Cargando…

Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody response in PCR positive patients: Comparison of nine tests in relation to clinical data

SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests are available in various formats, detecting different viral target proteins and antibody subclasses. The specificity and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests are known to vary and very few studies have addressed the performance of these tests in COVID-19 patient groups...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Naaber, Paul, Hunt, Kaidi, Pesukova, Jaana, Haljasmägi, Liis, Rumm, Pauliina, Peterson, Pärt, Hololejenko, Jelena, Eero, Irina, Jõgi, Piia, Toompere, Karolin, Sepp, Epp
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7591045/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33108380
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237548
_version_ 1783600915207421952
author Naaber, Paul
Hunt, Kaidi
Pesukova, Jaana
Haljasmägi, Liis
Rumm, Pauliina
Peterson, Pärt
Hololejenko, Jelena
Eero, Irina
Jõgi, Piia
Toompere, Karolin
Sepp, Epp
author_facet Naaber, Paul
Hunt, Kaidi
Pesukova, Jaana
Haljasmägi, Liis
Rumm, Pauliina
Peterson, Pärt
Hololejenko, Jelena
Eero, Irina
Jõgi, Piia
Toompere, Karolin
Sepp, Epp
author_sort Naaber, Paul
collection PubMed
description SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests are available in various formats, detecting different viral target proteins and antibody subclasses. The specificity and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests are known to vary and very few studies have addressed the performance of these tests in COVID-19 patient groups at different time points. We here compared the sensitivity and specificity of seven commercial (SNIBE, Epitope, Euroimmun, Roche, Abbott, DiaSorin, Biosensor) and two in-house LIPS assays (LIPS N and LIPS S-RBD) IgG/total Ab tests in serum samples from 97 COVID-19 patients and 100 controls, and correlated the results with the patients’ clinical data and the time-point the test was performed. We found a remarkable variation in the sensitivity of antibody tests with the following performance: LIPS N (91.8%), Epitope (85.6%), Abbott and in-house LIPS S-RBD (both 84.5%), Roche (83.5%), Euroimmun (82.5%), DiaSorin (81.4%), SNIBE (70.1%), and Biosensor (64.9%). The overall agreement between the tests was between 71–95%, whereas the specificity of all tests was within 98–100%. The correlation with patients’ clinical symptoms score ranged from strongest in LIPS N (ρ = 0.41; p<0.001) to nonsignificant in LIPS S-RBD. Furthermore, the time of testing since symptom onset had an impact on the sensitivity of some tests. Our study highlights the importance to consider clinical symptoms, time of testing, and using more than one viral antigen in SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. Our results suggest that some antibody tests are more sensitive for the detection of antibodies in early stage and asymptomatic patients, which may explain the contradictory results of previous studies and should be taken into consideration in clinical practice and epidemiological studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7591045
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75910452020-10-30 Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody response in PCR positive patients: Comparison of nine tests in relation to clinical data Naaber, Paul Hunt, Kaidi Pesukova, Jaana Haljasmägi, Liis Rumm, Pauliina Peterson, Pärt Hololejenko, Jelena Eero, Irina Jõgi, Piia Toompere, Karolin Sepp, Epp PLoS One Research Article SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests are available in various formats, detecting different viral target proteins and antibody subclasses. The specificity and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests are known to vary and very few studies have addressed the performance of these tests in COVID-19 patient groups at different time points. We here compared the sensitivity and specificity of seven commercial (SNIBE, Epitope, Euroimmun, Roche, Abbott, DiaSorin, Biosensor) and two in-house LIPS assays (LIPS N and LIPS S-RBD) IgG/total Ab tests in serum samples from 97 COVID-19 patients and 100 controls, and correlated the results with the patients’ clinical data and the time-point the test was performed. We found a remarkable variation in the sensitivity of antibody tests with the following performance: LIPS N (91.8%), Epitope (85.6%), Abbott and in-house LIPS S-RBD (both 84.5%), Roche (83.5%), Euroimmun (82.5%), DiaSorin (81.4%), SNIBE (70.1%), and Biosensor (64.9%). The overall agreement between the tests was between 71–95%, whereas the specificity of all tests was within 98–100%. The correlation with patients’ clinical symptoms score ranged from strongest in LIPS N (ρ = 0.41; p<0.001) to nonsignificant in LIPS S-RBD. Furthermore, the time of testing since symptom onset had an impact on the sensitivity of some tests. Our study highlights the importance to consider clinical symptoms, time of testing, and using more than one viral antigen in SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. Our results suggest that some antibody tests are more sensitive for the detection of antibodies in early stage and asymptomatic patients, which may explain the contradictory results of previous studies and should be taken into consideration in clinical practice and epidemiological studies. Public Library of Science 2020-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7591045/ /pubmed/33108380 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237548 Text en © 2020 Naaber et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Naaber, Paul
Hunt, Kaidi
Pesukova, Jaana
Haljasmägi, Liis
Rumm, Pauliina
Peterson, Pärt
Hololejenko, Jelena
Eero, Irina
Jõgi, Piia
Toompere, Karolin
Sepp, Epp
Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody response in PCR positive patients: Comparison of nine tests in relation to clinical data
title Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody response in PCR positive patients: Comparison of nine tests in relation to clinical data
title_full Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody response in PCR positive patients: Comparison of nine tests in relation to clinical data
title_fullStr Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody response in PCR positive patients: Comparison of nine tests in relation to clinical data
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody response in PCR positive patients: Comparison of nine tests in relation to clinical data
title_short Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody response in PCR positive patients: Comparison of nine tests in relation to clinical data
title_sort evaluation of sars-cov-2 igg antibody response in pcr positive patients: comparison of nine tests in relation to clinical data
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7591045/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33108380
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237548
work_keys_str_mv AT naaberpaul evaluationofsarscov2iggantibodyresponseinpcrpositivepatientscomparisonofninetestsinrelationtoclinicaldata
AT huntkaidi evaluationofsarscov2iggantibodyresponseinpcrpositivepatientscomparisonofninetestsinrelationtoclinicaldata
AT pesukovajaana evaluationofsarscov2iggantibodyresponseinpcrpositivepatientscomparisonofninetestsinrelationtoclinicaldata
AT haljasmagiliis evaluationofsarscov2iggantibodyresponseinpcrpositivepatientscomparisonofninetestsinrelationtoclinicaldata
AT rummpauliina evaluationofsarscov2iggantibodyresponseinpcrpositivepatientscomparisonofninetestsinrelationtoclinicaldata
AT petersonpart evaluationofsarscov2iggantibodyresponseinpcrpositivepatientscomparisonofninetestsinrelationtoclinicaldata
AT hololejenkojelena evaluationofsarscov2iggantibodyresponseinpcrpositivepatientscomparisonofninetestsinrelationtoclinicaldata
AT eeroirina evaluationofsarscov2iggantibodyresponseinpcrpositivepatientscomparisonofninetestsinrelationtoclinicaldata
AT jogipiia evaluationofsarscov2iggantibodyresponseinpcrpositivepatientscomparisonofninetestsinrelationtoclinicaldata
AT toomperekarolin evaluationofsarscov2iggantibodyresponseinpcrpositivepatientscomparisonofninetestsinrelationtoclinicaldata
AT seppepp evaluationofsarscov2iggantibodyresponseinpcrpositivepatientscomparisonofninetestsinrelationtoclinicaldata