Dataset Information

Evaluation of serological assays for SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing from dried blood spots collected from cohorts with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Dried blood spot (DBS) specimens are a useful serosurveillance tool particularly in hard-to-reach populations but their application for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection is poorly characterised.

Objectives

To compare detection of naturally acquired SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in paired DBS and serum specimens using commercially available serological immunoassays.

Study design

Specimens were collected through St Vincent's Hospital observational post COVID-19 cohort study (ADAPT). Laboratory spotted DBS from venepuncture were initially tested on seven assays, a DBS validation completed on three with clinically collected fingerstick DBSs tested on one.

Results

Sensitivity for Euroimmun nucleocapsid (NCP) IgG ELISA from laboratory spotted DBS (n=145), Euroimmun spike, IgG ELISA from laboratory spotted DBS (n=161), and Binding Site total antibody ELISA from clinically collected fingerstick DBS (n=391) was 100% (95% CI: 95.8-100%), 100% (95% CI: 95.8-100%) and 92.9% (95% CI: 89.5-95.5%), respectively. Specificity was 66.2% (95% CI: 53.6-77.0%), 96% (95% CI: 88.7-99.1%) and 98.8% (95% CI: 93.3-99.9%), respectively. All three assays' results displayed a strong positive correlation between DBS compared to paired serum.

Conclusions

The Binding Site™ spike total antibody and Euroimmun™ spike IgG ELISAs provided good analytical performance, demonstrating that DBS specimens could facilitate specimen collection in the epidemiological surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This is highly applicable in populations and settings where venepuncture is problematic (including community based regional/remote settings, nursing homes, prisons, and schools).

SUBMITTER: Catlett B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9225964 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundReal-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for the identification of viral nucleic acid is the current standard for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but technical issues limit its utilization for large-scale screening. Serological immunoglobulin M (IgM)/IgG testing has been proposed as a useful tool for detecting SARS-CoV-2 exposure.ObjectiveThe objective of our study was to compare the results of the rapid serological VivaDiag test for SARS-CoV-2-related IgM/IgG detection with those of the standard RT-PCR laboratory test for identifying SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid.MethodsWe simultaneously performed both serological and molecular tests with a consecutive series of 191 symptomatic patients. The results provided by a new rapid serological colorimetric test for analyzing IgM/IgG expression were compared with those of RT-PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 detection.ResultsOf the 191 subjects, 70 (36.6%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 based on RT-PCR results, while 34 (17.3%) tested positive based on serological IgM/IgG expression. Additionally, 13 (6.8%) subjects tested positive based on serological test results, but also tested negative based on RT-PCR results. The rapid serological test had a sensitivity of 30% and a specificity of 89% compared to the standard RT-PCR assay. Interestingly, the performance of both assays improved 8 days after symptom appearance. After 10 days had passed since symptom appearance, the predictive value of the rapid serological test was higher than that of the standard molecular assay (proportion of positive results: 40% vs 20%). Multivariate analysis showed that age >58 years (P<.01) and period of >15 days after symptom onset (P<.02) were significant and independent factors associated with serological test positivity.ConclusionsThe rapid serological test analyzed in this study seems limited in terms of usefulness when diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, it may be useful for providing relevant information on people's immunoreaction to COVID-19 exposure.