Cargando…

Comparison of eight commercial, high-throughput, automated or ELISA assays detecting SARS-CoV-2 IgG or total antibody

BACKGROUND: Many commercial assays, of different designs, detecting SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies exist but with little experience with them. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of assays detecting IgG or total antibodies to N or S antigens, validated for routine use in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Trabaud, Mary-Anne, Icard, Vinca, Milon, Marie-Paule, Bal, Antonin, Lina, Bruno, Escuret, Vanessa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier B.V. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7476603/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32942137
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104613
_version_ 1783579733963833344
author Trabaud, Mary-Anne
Icard, Vinca
Milon, Marie-Paule
Bal, Antonin
Lina, Bruno
Escuret, Vanessa
author_facet Trabaud, Mary-Anne
Icard, Vinca
Milon, Marie-Paule
Bal, Antonin
Lina, Bruno
Escuret, Vanessa
author_sort Trabaud, Mary-Anne
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Many commercial assays, of different designs, detecting SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies exist but with little experience with them. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of assays detecting IgG or total antibodies to N or S antigens, validated for routine use in France, with samples from subjects with more or less severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Eight assays were used: Abbott Architect, DiaSorin Liaison®, bioMérieux Vidas®, Roche Elecsys Cobas®, Siemens Atellica®, BioRad Platelia ELISA, Epitope Diagnostics ELISA, and Wantai ELISA. The tested population included 86 samples from 40 hospitalized subjects and 28 outpatients at different time from symptom onset. RESULTS: The positivity rate varied depending on the assay but was greater for all assays in hospitalized than non-hospitalized patients. Despite a good correlation between the assays, discrepancies occurred, without a systematic origin, even for samples taken more than 20 days after symptom onset. These discrepancies were linked to low antibody levels in pauci-symptomatic patients. CONCLUSION: Whichever assay is chosen, a false negative result may need to be ruled out with another test in a risk situation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7476603
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier B.V.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74766032020-09-08 Comparison of eight commercial, high-throughput, automated or ELISA assays detecting SARS-CoV-2 IgG or total antibody Trabaud, Mary-Anne Icard, Vinca Milon, Marie-Paule Bal, Antonin Lina, Bruno Escuret, Vanessa J Clin Virol Short Communication BACKGROUND: Many commercial assays, of different designs, detecting SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies exist but with little experience with them. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of assays detecting IgG or total antibodies to N or S antigens, validated for routine use in France, with samples from subjects with more or less severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Eight assays were used: Abbott Architect, DiaSorin Liaison®, bioMérieux Vidas®, Roche Elecsys Cobas®, Siemens Atellica®, BioRad Platelia ELISA, Epitope Diagnostics ELISA, and Wantai ELISA. The tested population included 86 samples from 40 hospitalized subjects and 28 outpatients at different time from symptom onset. RESULTS: The positivity rate varied depending on the assay but was greater for all assays in hospitalized than non-hospitalized patients. Despite a good correlation between the assays, discrepancies occurred, without a systematic origin, even for samples taken more than 20 days after symptom onset. These discrepancies were linked to low antibody levels in pauci-symptomatic patients. CONCLUSION: Whichever assay is chosen, a false negative result may need to be ruled out with another test in a risk situation. Elsevier B.V. 2020-11 2020-09-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7476603/ /pubmed/32942137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104613 Text en © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Short Communication
Trabaud, Mary-Anne
Icard, Vinca
Milon, Marie-Paule
Bal, Antonin
Lina, Bruno
Escuret, Vanessa
Comparison of eight commercial, high-throughput, automated or ELISA assays detecting SARS-CoV-2 IgG or total antibody
title Comparison of eight commercial, high-throughput, automated or ELISA assays detecting SARS-CoV-2 IgG or total antibody
title_full Comparison of eight commercial, high-throughput, automated or ELISA assays detecting SARS-CoV-2 IgG or total antibody
title_fullStr Comparison of eight commercial, high-throughput, automated or ELISA assays detecting SARS-CoV-2 IgG or total antibody
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of eight commercial, high-throughput, automated or ELISA assays detecting SARS-CoV-2 IgG or total antibody
title_short Comparison of eight commercial, high-throughput, automated or ELISA assays detecting SARS-CoV-2 IgG or total antibody
title_sort comparison of eight commercial, high-throughput, automated or elisa assays detecting sars-cov-2 igg or total antibody
topic Short Communication
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7476603/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32942137
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104613
work_keys_str_mv AT trabaudmaryanne comparisonofeightcommercialhighthroughputautomatedorelisaassaysdetectingsarscov2iggortotalantibody
AT icardvinca comparisonofeightcommercialhighthroughputautomatedorelisaassaysdetectingsarscov2iggortotalantibody
AT milonmariepaule comparisonofeightcommercialhighthroughputautomatedorelisaassaysdetectingsarscov2iggortotalantibody
AT balantonin comparisonofeightcommercialhighthroughputautomatedorelisaassaysdetectingsarscov2iggortotalantibody
AT linabruno comparisonofeightcommercialhighthroughputautomatedorelisaassaysdetectingsarscov2iggortotalantibody
AT escuretvanessa comparisonofeightcommercialhighthroughputautomatedorelisaassaysdetectingsarscov2iggortotalantibody