Cargando…
Evaluation of sixteen ELISA SARS-CoV-2 serological tests
BACKGROUND: In response to the current COVID-19 pandemic, multiple companies marketed serological tests. Rigorous, independent and comparative performances of these assays on defined clinical specimens are needed. METHODS: In a first preliminary phase, we investigated 16 IgG, IgM, IgA and pan Ig ser...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8295192/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34365228 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2021.104931 |
_version_ | 1783725387563401216 |
---|---|
author | Jacot, Damien Moraz, Milo Coste, Alix T. Aubry, Christele Sacks, Jilian A. Greub, Gilbert Croxatto, Antony |
author_facet | Jacot, Damien Moraz, Milo Coste, Alix T. Aubry, Christele Sacks, Jilian A. Greub, Gilbert Croxatto, Antony |
author_sort | Jacot, Damien |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In response to the current COVID-19 pandemic, multiple companies marketed serological tests. Rigorous, independent and comparative performances of these assays on defined clinical specimens are needed. METHODS: In a first preliminary phase, we investigated 16 IgG, IgM, IgA and pan Ig serological ELISA using a panel of 180 sera, comprising 97 sera from patients with a positive RT-PCR, and 83 negative sera sampled before November 1, 2019. In a second phase and to complete the evaluation on the full panel (100 positive and 300 negative), tests that passed pre-defined exclusion criteria of 90% sensitivity and 97% specificity were further evaluated on 220 additional sera chosen to assess possible cross-reactivity with other human viral infections. RESULTS: Among the 16 tests evaluated in the preliminary phase, two were excluded due to insufficient sensitivity at 15 days post-symptom onset and one was excluded due to poor specificity. Of the 13 tests evaluated using the full panel comprised of a diverse pool of sera including those reactive against known respiratory viruses, no systematic cross-reactivity was observed. However, heterogeneities across tests were found. Consistent with kinetics of antibody expression, maximal sensitivity was found two weeks post-symptom onset. CONCLUSION: In this independent evaluation, we compared the performance of 16 SARS-CoV-2 serological tests using well-characterized sera and found 13 tests with more than 90% sensitivity at 15 days post-symptom onset and 97% specificity across a diverse range of negative samples. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8295192 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82951922021-07-22 Evaluation of sixteen ELISA SARS-CoV-2 serological tests Jacot, Damien Moraz, Milo Coste, Alix T. Aubry, Christele Sacks, Jilian A. Greub, Gilbert Croxatto, Antony J Clin Virol Article BACKGROUND: In response to the current COVID-19 pandemic, multiple companies marketed serological tests. Rigorous, independent and comparative performances of these assays on defined clinical specimens are needed. METHODS: In a first preliminary phase, we investigated 16 IgG, IgM, IgA and pan Ig serological ELISA using a panel of 180 sera, comprising 97 sera from patients with a positive RT-PCR, and 83 negative sera sampled before November 1, 2019. In a second phase and to complete the evaluation on the full panel (100 positive and 300 negative), tests that passed pre-defined exclusion criteria of 90% sensitivity and 97% specificity were further evaluated on 220 additional sera chosen to assess possible cross-reactivity with other human viral infections. RESULTS: Among the 16 tests evaluated in the preliminary phase, two were excluded due to insufficient sensitivity at 15 days post-symptom onset and one was excluded due to poor specificity. Of the 13 tests evaluated using the full panel comprised of a diverse pool of sera including those reactive against known respiratory viruses, no systematic cross-reactivity was observed. However, heterogeneities across tests were found. Consistent with kinetics of antibody expression, maximal sensitivity was found two weeks post-symptom onset. CONCLUSION: In this independent evaluation, we compared the performance of 16 SARS-CoV-2 serological tests using well-characterized sera and found 13 tests with more than 90% sensitivity at 15 days post-symptom onset and 97% specificity across a diverse range of negative samples. The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. 2021-09 2021-07-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8295192/ /pubmed/34365228 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2021.104931 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. 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 | Article Jacot, Damien Moraz, Milo Coste, Alix T. Aubry, Christele Sacks, Jilian A. Greub, Gilbert Croxatto, Antony Evaluation of sixteen ELISA SARS-CoV-2 serological tests |
title | Evaluation of sixteen ELISA SARS-CoV-2 serological tests |
title_full | Evaluation of sixteen ELISA SARS-CoV-2 serological tests |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of sixteen ELISA SARS-CoV-2 serological tests |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of sixteen ELISA SARS-CoV-2 serological tests |
title_short | Evaluation of sixteen ELISA SARS-CoV-2 serological tests |
title_sort | evaluation of sixteen elisa sars-cov-2 serological tests |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8295192/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34365228 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2021.104931 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jacotdamien evaluationofsixteenelisasarscov2serologicaltests AT morazmilo evaluationofsixteenelisasarscov2serologicaltests AT costealixt evaluationofsixteenelisasarscov2serologicaltests AT aubrychristele evaluationofsixteenelisasarscov2serologicaltests AT sacksjiliana evaluationofsixteenelisasarscov2serologicaltests AT greubgilbert evaluationofsixteenelisasarscov2serologicaltests AT croxattoantony evaluationofsixteenelisasarscov2serologicaltests |