Cargando…

Comparative performance of multiplex salivary and commercially available serologic assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralization titers

Oral fluid (hereafter saliva) offers a non-invasive sampling method for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. However, data comparing performance of salivary tests against commercially-available serologic and neutralizing antibody (nAb) assays are lacking. This study compared the performance of a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Heaney, Christopher D., Pisanic, Nora, Randad, Pranay R., Kruczynski, Kate, Howard, Tyrone, Zhu, Xianming, Littlefield, Kirsten, Patel, Eshan U., Shrestha, Ruchee, Laeyendecker, Oliver, Shoham, Shmuel, Sullivan, David, Gebo, Kelly, Hanley, Daniel, Redd, Andrew D., Quinn, Thomas C., Casadevall, Arturo, Zenilman, Jonathan M., Pekosz, Andrew, Bloch, Evan M., Tobian, Aaron A. R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7852272/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33532806
http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.28.21250717
_version_ 1783645788717449216
author Heaney, Christopher D.
Pisanic, Nora
Randad, Pranay R.
Kruczynski, Kate
Howard, Tyrone
Zhu, Xianming
Littlefield, Kirsten
Patel, Eshan U.
Shrestha, Ruchee
Laeyendecker, Oliver
Shoham, Shmuel
Sullivan, David
Gebo, Kelly
Hanley, Daniel
Redd, Andrew D.
Quinn, Thomas C.
Casadevall, Arturo
Zenilman, Jonathan M.
Pekosz, Andrew
Bloch, Evan M.
Tobian, Aaron A. R.
author_facet Heaney, Christopher D.
Pisanic, Nora
Randad, Pranay R.
Kruczynski, Kate
Howard, Tyrone
Zhu, Xianming
Littlefield, Kirsten
Patel, Eshan U.
Shrestha, Ruchee
Laeyendecker, Oliver
Shoham, Shmuel
Sullivan, David
Gebo, Kelly
Hanley, Daniel
Redd, Andrew D.
Quinn, Thomas C.
Casadevall, Arturo
Zenilman, Jonathan M.
Pekosz, Andrew
Bloch, Evan M.
Tobian, Aaron A. R.
author_sort Heaney, Christopher D.
collection PubMed
description Oral fluid (hereafter saliva) offers a non-invasive sampling method for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. However, data comparing performance of salivary tests against commercially-available serologic and neutralizing antibody (nAb) assays are lacking. This study compared the performance of a multiplex salivary SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay targeting antibodies to nucleocapsid (N), receptor binding domain (RBD) and spike (S) antigens to three commercially-available SARS-CoV-2 serology enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) (Ortho Vitros, Euroimmun, and BioRad) and nAb. Paired saliva and plasma samples were collected from 101 eligible COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) donors >14 days since PCR+ confirmed diagnosis. Concordance was evaluated using positive (PPA) and negative (NPA) percent agreement, overall percent agreement (PA), and Cohen’s kappa coefficient. The range between salivary and plasma EIAs for SARS-CoV-2-specific N was PPA: 54.4–92.1% and NPA: 69.2–91.7%, for RBD was PPA: 89.9–100% and NPA: 50.0–84.6%, and for S was PPA: 50.6–96.6% and NPA: 50.0–100%. Compared to a plasma nAb assay, the multiplex salivary assay PPA ranged from 62.3% (N) and 98.6% (RBD) and NPA ranged from 18.8% (RBD) to 96.9% (S). Combinations of N, RBD, and S and a summary algorithmic index of all three (N/RBD/S) in saliva produced ranges of PPA: 87.6–98.9% and NPA: 50–91.7% with the three EIAs and ranges of PPA: 88.4–98.6% and NPA: 21.9–34.4% with the nAb assay. A multiplex salivary SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay demonstrated comparable performance to three commercially-available plasma EIAs and a nAb assay, and may be a viable alternative to assist in screening CCP donors and monitoring population-based seroprevalence and vaccine antibody response.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7852272
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78522722021-02-03 Comparative performance of multiplex salivary and commercially available serologic assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralization titers Heaney, Christopher D. Pisanic, Nora Randad, Pranay R. Kruczynski, Kate Howard, Tyrone Zhu, Xianming Littlefield, Kirsten Patel, Eshan U. Shrestha, Ruchee Laeyendecker, Oliver Shoham, Shmuel Sullivan, David Gebo, Kelly Hanley, Daniel Redd, Andrew D. Quinn, Thomas C. Casadevall, Arturo Zenilman, Jonathan M. Pekosz, Andrew Bloch, Evan M. Tobian, Aaron A. R. medRxiv Article Oral fluid (hereafter saliva) offers a non-invasive sampling method for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. However, data comparing performance of salivary tests against commercially-available serologic and neutralizing antibody (nAb) assays are lacking. This study compared the performance of a multiplex salivary SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay targeting antibodies to nucleocapsid (N), receptor binding domain (RBD) and spike (S) antigens to three commercially-available SARS-CoV-2 serology enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) (Ortho Vitros, Euroimmun, and BioRad) and nAb. Paired saliva and plasma samples were collected from 101 eligible COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) donors >14 days since PCR+ confirmed diagnosis. Concordance was evaluated using positive (PPA) and negative (NPA) percent agreement, overall percent agreement (PA), and Cohen’s kappa coefficient. The range between salivary and plasma EIAs for SARS-CoV-2-specific N was PPA: 54.4–92.1% and NPA: 69.2–91.7%, for RBD was PPA: 89.9–100% and NPA: 50.0–84.6%, and for S was PPA: 50.6–96.6% and NPA: 50.0–100%. Compared to a plasma nAb assay, the multiplex salivary assay PPA ranged from 62.3% (N) and 98.6% (RBD) and NPA ranged from 18.8% (RBD) to 96.9% (S). Combinations of N, RBD, and S and a summary algorithmic index of all three (N/RBD/S) in saliva produced ranges of PPA: 87.6–98.9% and NPA: 50–91.7% with the three EIAs and ranges of PPA: 88.4–98.6% and NPA: 21.9–34.4% with the nAb assay. A multiplex salivary SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay demonstrated comparable performance to three commercially-available plasma EIAs and a nAb assay, and may be a viable alternative to assist in screening CCP donors and monitoring population-based seroprevalence and vaccine antibody response. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 2021-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7852272/ /pubmed/33532806 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.28.21250717 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which allows reusers to copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form only, for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.
spellingShingle Article
Heaney, Christopher D.
Pisanic, Nora
Randad, Pranay R.
Kruczynski, Kate
Howard, Tyrone
Zhu, Xianming
Littlefield, Kirsten
Patel, Eshan U.
Shrestha, Ruchee
Laeyendecker, Oliver
Shoham, Shmuel
Sullivan, David
Gebo, Kelly
Hanley, Daniel
Redd, Andrew D.
Quinn, Thomas C.
Casadevall, Arturo
Zenilman, Jonathan M.
Pekosz, Andrew
Bloch, Evan M.
Tobian, Aaron A. R.
Comparative performance of multiplex salivary and commercially available serologic assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralization titers
title Comparative performance of multiplex salivary and commercially available serologic assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralization titers
title_full Comparative performance of multiplex salivary and commercially available serologic assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralization titers
title_fullStr Comparative performance of multiplex salivary and commercially available serologic assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralization titers
title_full_unstemmed Comparative performance of multiplex salivary and commercially available serologic assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralization titers
title_short Comparative performance of multiplex salivary and commercially available serologic assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralization titers
title_sort comparative performance of multiplex salivary and commercially available serologic assays to detect sars-cov-2 igg and neutralization titers
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7852272/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33532806
http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.28.21250717
work_keys_str_mv AT heaneychristopherd comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT pisanicnora comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT randadpranayr comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT kruczynskikate comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT howardtyrone comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT zhuxianming comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT littlefieldkirsten comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT pateleshanu comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT shrestharuchee comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT laeyendeckeroliver comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT shohamshmuel comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT sullivandavid comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT gebokelly comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT hanleydaniel comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT reddandrewd comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT quinnthomasc comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT casadevallarturo comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT zenilmanjonathanm comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT pekoszandrew comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT blochevanm comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters
AT tobianaaronar comparativeperformanceofmultiplexsalivaryandcommerciallyavailableserologicassaystodetectsarscov2iggandneutralizationtiters