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 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 labo...

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: Published by Elsevier B.V. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8502080/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34695724
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2021.104997
Descripción
Sumario:Oral fluid (hereafter saliva) offers a non-invasive sampling method for 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 laboratory-developed 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 serologic 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, 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 variable, but comparable performance to three commercially-available plasma EIAs and a nAb assay, and may be a viable alternative to assist in monitoring population-based seroprevalence and vaccine antibody response.