Cargando…
Multicentre Performance Evaluation of the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoassay as an Aid in Determining Previous Exposure to SARS-CoV-2
INTRODUCTION: We performed a multicentre evaluation of the Elecsys(®) Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay (Roche Diagnostics), an assay utilising a recombinant protein representing the nucleocapsid (N) antigen, for the in vitro qualitative detection of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronav...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Healthcare
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8349665/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34368915 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40121-021-00504-9 |
_version_ | 1783735609974587392 |
---|---|
author | Riester, Elena Majchrzak, Mario Mühlbacher, Annelies Tinguely, Caroline Findeisen, Peter Hegel, Johannes Kolja Laimighofer, Michael Rank, Christopher M. Schönfeld, Kathrin Langen, Florina Laengin, Tina Niederhauser, Christoph |
author_facet | Riester, Elena Majchrzak, Mario Mühlbacher, Annelies Tinguely, Caroline Findeisen, Peter Hegel, Johannes Kolja Laimighofer, Michael Rank, Christopher M. Schönfeld, Kathrin Langen, Florina Laengin, Tina Niederhauser, Christoph |
author_sort | Riester, Elena |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: We performed a multicentre evaluation of the Elecsys(®) Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay (Roche Diagnostics), an assay utilising a recombinant protein representing the nucleocapsid (N) antigen, for the in vitro qualitative detection of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: Specificity was evaluated using serum/plasma samples from blood donors and routine diagnostic specimens collected before September 2019 (i.e., presumed negative for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies); sensitivity was evaluated using samples from patients with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Point estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Method comparison was performed versus commercially available assays. RESULTS: Overall specificity for the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay (n = 9575) was 99.85% (95% CI 99.75–99.92): blood donors (n = 6714; 99.82%), routine diagnostic specimens (n = 2861; 99.93%), pregnant women (n = 2256; 99.91%), paediatric samples (n = 205; 100.00%). The Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay demonstrated significantly higher specificity versus LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG (99.71% vs. 98.48%), EUROIMMUN Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG (100.00% vs. 94.87%), ADVIA Centaur SARS-CoV-2 Total (100.00% vs. 87.32%) and iFlash SARS-CoV-2 IgM (100.00% vs. 99.58%) assays, and comparable specificity to ARCHITECT SARS-CoV-2 IgG (99.75% vs. 99.65%) and iFlash SARS-CoV-2 IgG (100.00% vs. 100.00%) assays. Overall sensitivity for Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay samples drawn at least 14 days post-PCR confirmation (n = 219) was 93.61% (95% CI 89.51–96.46). No statistically significant differences in sensitivity were observed between the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay versus EUROIMMUN Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG (90.32% vs. 95.16%) and ARCHITECT SARS-CoV-2 IgG (84.81% vs. 87.34%) assays. The Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay showed significantly lower sensitivity versus ADVIA Centaur SARS-CoV-2 Total (85.19% vs. 95.06%) and iFlash SARS-CoV-2 IgG (86.25% vs. 93.75%) assays, but significantly higher sensitivity versus the iFlash SARS-CoV-2 IgM assay (86.25% vs. 33.75%). CONCLUSION: The Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay demonstrated very high specificity and high sensitivity in samples collected at least 14 days post-PCR confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection, supporting its use to aid in determination of previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-021-00504-9. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8349665 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83496652021-08-09 Multicentre Performance Evaluation of the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoassay as an Aid in Determining Previous Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 Riester, Elena Majchrzak, Mario Mühlbacher, Annelies Tinguely, Caroline Findeisen, Peter Hegel, Johannes Kolja Laimighofer, Michael Rank, Christopher M. Schönfeld, Kathrin Langen, Florina Laengin, Tina Niederhauser, Christoph Infect Dis Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: We performed a multicentre evaluation of the Elecsys(®) Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay (Roche Diagnostics), an assay utilising a recombinant protein representing the nucleocapsid (N) antigen, for the in vitro qualitative detection of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: Specificity was evaluated using serum/plasma samples from blood donors and routine diagnostic specimens collected before September 2019 (i.e., presumed negative for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies); sensitivity was evaluated using samples from patients with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Point estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Method comparison was performed versus commercially available assays. RESULTS: Overall specificity for the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay (n = 9575) was 99.85% (95% CI 99.75–99.92): blood donors (n = 6714; 99.82%), routine diagnostic specimens (n = 2861; 99.93%), pregnant women (n = 2256; 99.91%), paediatric samples (n = 205; 100.00%). The Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay demonstrated significantly higher specificity versus LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG (99.71% vs. 98.48%), EUROIMMUN Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG (100.00% vs. 94.87%), ADVIA Centaur SARS-CoV-2 Total (100.00% vs. 87.32%) and iFlash SARS-CoV-2 IgM (100.00% vs. 99.58%) assays, and comparable specificity to ARCHITECT SARS-CoV-2 IgG (99.75% vs. 99.65%) and iFlash SARS-CoV-2 IgG (100.00% vs. 100.00%) assays. Overall sensitivity for Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay samples drawn at least 14 days post-PCR confirmation (n = 219) was 93.61% (95% CI 89.51–96.46). No statistically significant differences in sensitivity were observed between the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay versus EUROIMMUN Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG (90.32% vs. 95.16%) and ARCHITECT SARS-CoV-2 IgG (84.81% vs. 87.34%) assays. The Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay showed significantly lower sensitivity versus ADVIA Centaur SARS-CoV-2 Total (85.19% vs. 95.06%) and iFlash SARS-CoV-2 IgG (86.25% vs. 93.75%) assays, but significantly higher sensitivity versus the iFlash SARS-CoV-2 IgM assay (86.25% vs. 33.75%). CONCLUSION: The Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay demonstrated very high specificity and high sensitivity in samples collected at least 14 days post-PCR confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection, supporting its use to aid in determination of previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-021-00504-9. Springer Healthcare 2021-08-09 2021-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8349665/ /pubmed/34368915 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40121-021-00504-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Research Riester, Elena Majchrzak, Mario Mühlbacher, Annelies Tinguely, Caroline Findeisen, Peter Hegel, Johannes Kolja Laimighofer, Michael Rank, Christopher M. Schönfeld, Kathrin Langen, Florina Laengin, Tina Niederhauser, Christoph Multicentre Performance Evaluation of the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoassay as an Aid in Determining Previous Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 |
title | Multicentre Performance Evaluation of the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoassay as an Aid in Determining Previous Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 |
title_full | Multicentre Performance Evaluation of the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoassay as an Aid in Determining Previous Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 |
title_fullStr | Multicentre Performance Evaluation of the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoassay as an Aid in Determining Previous Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 |
title_full_unstemmed | Multicentre Performance Evaluation of the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoassay as an Aid in Determining Previous Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 |
title_short | Multicentre Performance Evaluation of the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoassay as an Aid in Determining Previous Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 |
title_sort | multicentre performance evaluation of the elecsys anti-sars-cov-2 immunoassay as an aid in determining previous exposure to sars-cov-2 |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8349665/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34368915 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40121-021-00504-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT riesterelena multicentreperformanceevaluationoftheelecsysantisarscov2immunoassayasanaidindeterminingpreviousexposuretosarscov2 AT majchrzakmario multicentreperformanceevaluationoftheelecsysantisarscov2immunoassayasanaidindeterminingpreviousexposuretosarscov2 AT muhlbacherannelies multicentreperformanceevaluationoftheelecsysantisarscov2immunoassayasanaidindeterminingpreviousexposuretosarscov2 AT tinguelycaroline multicentreperformanceevaluationoftheelecsysantisarscov2immunoassayasanaidindeterminingpreviousexposuretosarscov2 AT findeisenpeter multicentreperformanceevaluationoftheelecsysantisarscov2immunoassayasanaidindeterminingpreviousexposuretosarscov2 AT hegeljohanneskolja multicentreperformanceevaluationoftheelecsysantisarscov2immunoassayasanaidindeterminingpreviousexposuretosarscov2 AT laimighofermichael multicentreperformanceevaluationoftheelecsysantisarscov2immunoassayasanaidindeterminingpreviousexposuretosarscov2 AT rankchristopherm multicentreperformanceevaluationoftheelecsysantisarscov2immunoassayasanaidindeterminingpreviousexposuretosarscov2 AT schonfeldkathrin multicentreperformanceevaluationoftheelecsysantisarscov2immunoassayasanaidindeterminingpreviousexposuretosarscov2 AT langenflorina multicentreperformanceevaluationoftheelecsysantisarscov2immunoassayasanaidindeterminingpreviousexposuretosarscov2 AT laengintina multicentreperformanceevaluationoftheelecsysantisarscov2immunoassayasanaidindeterminingpreviousexposuretosarscov2 AT niederhauserchristoph multicentreperformanceevaluationoftheelecsysantisarscov2immunoassayasanaidindeterminingpreviousexposuretosarscov2 |