Evaluation of 3 SARS-CoV-2 IgG Antibody Assays and Correlation with Neutralizing Antibodies.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Antibodies, Neutralizing
/ immunology
Antibodies, Viral
/ blood
COVID-19
/ diagnosis
COVID-19 Serological Testing
/ methods
Child
Child, Preschool
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay
Female
High-Throughput Screening Assays
Humans
Immunoglobulin G
/ blood
Male
Middle Aged
SARS-CoV-2
/ immunology
Sensitivity and Specificity
Young Adult
COVID-19
SARS-CoV-2
serology
Journal
The journal of applied laboratory medicine
ISSN: 2576-9456
Titre abrégé: J Appl Lab Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101693884
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Apr 2021
29 Apr 2021
Historique:
received:
03
09
2020
accepted:
25
09
2020
pubmed:
17
10
2020
medline:
8
5
2021
entrez:
16
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
As serologic assays for SARS-CoV-2 become more widely utilized, it is important to understand their performance characteristics and correlation with neutralizing antibodies. We evaluated 3 commonly used SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays (Abbott, DiaSorin, and EUROIMMUN) for clinical sensitivity, specificity, and correlation with neutralizing antibodies, and then compared antibody kinetics during the acute phase of infection. Three panels of samples were tested on every assay. Sensitivity was assessed using a panel of 35 specimens serially collected from 7 patients with RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19. Specificity was determined using 100 sera samples collected in 2018 from healthy individuals prior to the outbreak. Analytical specificity was determined using a panel of 37 samples from individuals with respiratory illnesses other than COVID-19. Clinical sensitivity was 91.43% (95% CI 76.94-98.20%) for Abbott, and 88.57% (95% CI 73.26-96.80%) for both DiaSorin and EUROIMMUN. Clinical specificity was 99.00% (95% CI 94.55-99.97%) for Abbott and DiaSorin and 94.00% (95% CI 87.40-97.77%) for EUROIMMUN. The IgG assays demonstrated good qualitative agreement (minimum of 94%) and good correlation between the quantitative result for each combination of assays (r2 ≥ 0.90). The neutralizing antibody response did not necessarily follow the same temporal kinetics as the IgG response and did not necessarily correlate with IgG values. The 3 IgG antibody assays demonstrated comparable performance characteristics. Importantly, a qualitative positive IgG result obtained with any of the assays was associated with the presence of neutralizing antibodies; however, neutralizing antibody concentrations did not correlate well with signal to cutoff ratios.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
As serologic assays for SARS-CoV-2 become more widely utilized, it is important to understand their performance characteristics and correlation with neutralizing antibodies. We evaluated 3 commonly used SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays (Abbott, DiaSorin, and EUROIMMUN) for clinical sensitivity, specificity, and correlation with neutralizing antibodies, and then compared antibody kinetics during the acute phase of infection.
METHODS
METHODS
Three panels of samples were tested on every assay. Sensitivity was assessed using a panel of 35 specimens serially collected from 7 patients with RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19. Specificity was determined using 100 sera samples collected in 2018 from healthy individuals prior to the outbreak. Analytical specificity was determined using a panel of 37 samples from individuals with respiratory illnesses other than COVID-19.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Clinical sensitivity was 91.43% (95% CI 76.94-98.20%) for Abbott, and 88.57% (95% CI 73.26-96.80%) for both DiaSorin and EUROIMMUN. Clinical specificity was 99.00% (95% CI 94.55-99.97%) for Abbott and DiaSorin and 94.00% (95% CI 87.40-97.77%) for EUROIMMUN. The IgG assays demonstrated good qualitative agreement (minimum of 94%) and good correlation between the quantitative result for each combination of assays (r2 ≥ 0.90). The neutralizing antibody response did not necessarily follow the same temporal kinetics as the IgG response and did not necessarily correlate with IgG values.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The 3 IgG antibody assays demonstrated comparable performance characteristics. Importantly, a qualitative positive IgG result obtained with any of the assays was associated with the presence of neutralizing antibodies; however, neutralizing antibody concentrations did not correlate well with signal to cutoff ratios.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33064790
pii: 5926059
doi: 10.1093/jalm/jfaa188
pmc: PMC7665531
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Neutralizing
0
Antibodies, Viral
0
Immunoglobulin G
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
614-624Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© American Association for Clinical Chemistry 2020. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.