Comparative study of six SARS-CoV-2 serology assays: Diagnostic performance and antibody dynamics in a cohort of hospitalized patients for moderate to critical COVID-19.

Sameh Chamkhi, Tarak Dhaouadi, Imen Sfar, Salma Mokni, Alia Jebri, Dhouha Mansouri, Salma Ghedira, Emna Ben Jemia, Samia Ben Boujemaa, Mohamed Houissa, Hichem Aouina, Taïeb Ben Abdallah, Yousr Gorgi
{"title":"Comparative study of six SARS-CoV-2 serology assays: Diagnostic performance and antibody dynamics in a cohort of hospitalized patients for moderate to critical COVID-19.","authors":"Sameh Chamkhi,&nbsp;Tarak Dhaouadi,&nbsp;Imen Sfar,&nbsp;Salma Mokni,&nbsp;Alia Jebri,&nbsp;Dhouha Mansouri,&nbsp;Salma Ghedira,&nbsp;Emna Ben Jemia,&nbsp;Samia Ben Boujemaa,&nbsp;Mohamed Houissa,&nbsp;Hichem Aouina,&nbsp;Taïeb Ben Abdallah,&nbsp;Yousr Gorgi","doi":"10.1177/20587384211073232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To overcome the COVID-19 pandemic, serology assays are needed to identify past and ongoing infections. In this context, we evaluated the diagnostic performance of 6 immunoassays on samples from hospitalized patients for moderate to critical COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>701 serum samples obtained from 443 COVID-19 patients (G1: 356 positive RT-PCR patients and G2: 87 negative RT-PCR cases) and 108 pre-pandemic sera from blood donors were tested with 6 commercial immunoassays: (1) Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2, Roche (Nucleocapsid, N), (2) Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S, Roche (Spike, S), (3) Vidas SARS-COV-2 IgM/IgG, BioMérieux (S), (4) SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Abbott (N), (5) Access SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Beckman Coulter (Receptor Binding Domain), and (6) Standard F COVID-19 IgM/IgG Combo FIA, SD Biosensor (N).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Global sensitivities of the evaluated assays were as follows: (1) Roche anti-N = 74.5% [69.6-79.3], (2) Roche anti-S = 92.7% [84.7-100], (3) Vidas IgM = 74.9% [68.6-81.2], (4) Vidas IgG = 73.9% [67.6-80.1], (5) Abbott = 78.6% [63.4-93.8], (6) Beckman Coulter = 74.5% [62-86.9], (7) SD Biosensor IgM = 73.1% [61-85.1], and (8) SD Biosensor IgG = 76.9% [65.4-88.4]. Sensitivities increased gradually from week 1 to week 3 as follow: (1) Roche anti-N: 63.3%, 81% and 82.1%; (2) Vidas IgM: 68.2%, 83.2% and 85.9%; and (3) Vidas IgG: 66.7%, 79.1% and 86.6%. All immunoassays showed a specificity of 100%. Seropositivity was significantly associated with a higher frequency of critical COVID-19 (50.8% vs. 38.2%), <i>p</i> = 0.018, OR [95% CI] = 1.668 [1.09-2.553]. Inversely, death occurred more frequently in seronegative patients (28.7% vs. 13.6%), <i>p</i>=3.02 E-4, OR [95% CI] = 0.392 [0.233-0.658].</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Evaluated serology assays exhibited good sensitivities and excellent specificities. Sensitivities increased gradually after symptoms onset. Even if seropositivity is more frequent in patients with critical COVID-19, it may predict a recovery outcome.</p>","PeriodicalId":14046,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Immunopathology and Pharmacology","volume":"36 ","pages":"20587384211073232"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/03/56/10.1177_20587384211073232.PMC8819577.pdf","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Immunopathology and Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20587384211073232","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Background: To overcome the COVID-19 pandemic, serology assays are needed to identify past and ongoing infections. In this context, we evaluated the diagnostic performance of 6 immunoassays on samples from hospitalized patients for moderate to critical COVID-19.

Methods: 701 serum samples obtained from 443 COVID-19 patients (G1: 356 positive RT-PCR patients and G2: 87 negative RT-PCR cases) and 108 pre-pandemic sera from blood donors were tested with 6 commercial immunoassays: (1) Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2, Roche (Nucleocapsid, N), (2) Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S, Roche (Spike, S), (3) Vidas SARS-COV-2 IgM/IgG, BioMérieux (S), (4) SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Abbott (N), (5) Access SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Beckman Coulter (Receptor Binding Domain), and (6) Standard F COVID-19 IgM/IgG Combo FIA, SD Biosensor (N).

Results: Global sensitivities of the evaluated assays were as follows: (1) Roche anti-N = 74.5% [69.6-79.3], (2) Roche anti-S = 92.7% [84.7-100], (3) Vidas IgM = 74.9% [68.6-81.2], (4) Vidas IgG = 73.9% [67.6-80.1], (5) Abbott = 78.6% [63.4-93.8], (6) Beckman Coulter = 74.5% [62-86.9], (7) SD Biosensor IgM = 73.1% [61-85.1], and (8) SD Biosensor IgG = 76.9% [65.4-88.4]. Sensitivities increased gradually from week 1 to week 3 as follow: (1) Roche anti-N: 63.3%, 81% and 82.1%; (2) Vidas IgM: 68.2%, 83.2% and 85.9%; and (3) Vidas IgG: 66.7%, 79.1% and 86.6%. All immunoassays showed a specificity of 100%. Seropositivity was significantly associated with a higher frequency of critical COVID-19 (50.8% vs. 38.2%), p = 0.018, OR [95% CI] = 1.668 [1.09-2.553]. Inversely, death occurred more frequently in seronegative patients (28.7% vs. 13.6%), p=3.02 E-4, OR [95% CI] = 0.392 [0.233-0.658].

Conclusion: Evaluated serology assays exhibited good sensitivities and excellent specificities. Sensitivities increased gradually after symptoms onset. Even if seropositivity is more frequent in patients with critical COVID-19, it may predict a recovery outcome.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
6项SARS-CoV-2血清学检测在中重度肺炎住院患者中的诊断性能和抗体动态的比较研究
背景:为了克服COVID-19大流行,需要进行血清学检测以确定过去和正在发生的感染。在此背景下,我们评估了对住院患者中至重症COVID-19样本的6种免疫测定的诊断性能。方法:对443例COVID-19患者(G1: 356例RT-PCR阳性,G2: 87例RT-PCR阴性)的701份血清和108份大流行前献血者的血清进行6种商业免疫测定:(1) Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2, Roche (Nucleocapsid, N), (2) Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S, Roche (Spike, S), (3) Vidas SARS-COV-2 IgM/IgG, biomacrieux (S), (4) SARS-COV-2 IgG, Abbott (N), (5) Access SARS-COV-2 IgG, Beckman Coulter(受体结合域),(6)Standard F COVID-19 IgM/IgG Combo FIA, SD Biosensor (N)。结果:评价方法的整体敏感性如下:(1) Roche anti-N = 74.5% [69.6-79.3], (2) Roche anti-S = 92.7% [84.7-100], (3) Vidas IgM = 74.9% [68.6-81.2], (4) Vidas IgG = 73.9% [67.6-80.1], (5) Abbott = 78.6% [63.4-93.8], (6) Beckman Coulter = 74.5% [62-86.9], (7) SD Biosensor IgM = 73.1% [61-85.1], (8) SD Biosensor IgG = 76.9%[65.4-88.4]。从第1周到第3周,敏感性逐渐升高:(1)Roche anti-N分别为63.3%、81%和82.1%;(2) Vidas IgM分别为68.2%、83.2%和85.9%;(3) Vidas IgG分别为66.7%、79.1%和86.6%。所有免疫分析均显示特异性为100%。血清阳性与危重型COVID-19的发生频率显著相关(50.8%比38.2%),p = 0.018, OR [95% CI] = 1.668[1.09-2.553]。相反,血清阴性患者的死亡发生率更高(28.7%比13.6%),p=3.02 E-4, OR [95% CI] = 0.392[0.233-0.658]。结论:评价的血清学方法具有良好的敏感性和良好的特异性。症状出现后,敏感性逐渐升高。即使血清阳性在COVID-19危重患者中更为常见,它也可以预测康复结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
88
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Immunopathology and Pharmacology is an Open Access peer-reviewed journal publishing original papers describing research in the fields of immunology, pathology and pharmacology. The intention is that the journal should reflect both the experimental and clinical aspects of immunology as well as advances in the understanding of the pathology and pharmacology of the immune system.
期刊最新文献
Resveratrol promotes the differentiation of human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells into esophageal fibroblasts via AKT signaling pathway Clinical role of NDRG2-based methylation status on survival pattern of glioblastoma A novel immune cell signature for predicting glioblastoma after radiotherapy prognosis and guiding therapy Low-dose metformin suppresses hepatocellular carcinoma metastasis via the AMPK/JNK/IL-8 pathway Macrophage-derived exosomal miRNA-141 triggers endothelial cell pyroptosis by targeting NLRP3 to accelerate sepsis progression
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1