PlumX Metrics
Embed PlumX Metrics

Clinical performance of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody tests and potential protective immunity

bioRxiv, ISSN: 2692-8205
2020
  • 18
    Citations
  • 0
    Usage
  • 0
    Captures
  • 1
    Mentions
  • 20
    Social Media
Metric Options:   Counts1 Year3 Year

Metrics Details

  • Citations
    18
    • Citation Indexes
      18
      • CrossRef
        18
  • Mentions
    1
    • News Mentions
      1
      • News
        1
  • Social Media
    20
    • Shares, Likes & Comments
      20
      • Facebook
        20

Most Recent News

Varied performance of SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests in detecting protective immunity

The performance of commercially available serological tests in real patient samples and the correlates of immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) provided

Article Description

As the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic continues, serological assays are urgently needed for rapid diagnosis, contact tracing and for epidemiological studies. So far, there is little data on how commercially available tests perform with real patient samples and if detected IgG antibodies provide protective immunity. Focusing on IgG antibodies, we demonstrate the performance of two ELISA assays (Euroimmun SARS-CoV-2 IgG & Vircell COVID-19 ELISA IgG) in comparison to one lateral flow assay ((LFA) FaStep COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Device) and two in-house developed assays (immunofluorescence assay (IFA) and plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT)). We tested follow up serum/plasma samples of individuals PCR-diagnosed with COVID-19. Most of the SARS-CoV-2 samples were from individuals with moderate to severe clinical course, who required an in-patient hospital stay. For all examined assays, the sensitivity ranged from 58.8 to 76.5% for the early phase of infection (days 5-9) and from 93.8 to 100% for the later period (days 10-18) after PCR-diagnosed with COVID-19. With exception of one sample, all positive tested samples in the analysed cohort, using the commercially available assays examined (including the in-house developed IFA), demonstrated neutralizing (protective) properties in the PRNT, indicating a potential protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2. Regarding specificity, there was evidence that samples of endemic coronavirus (HCoV-OC43, HCoV-229E) and Epstein Barr virus (EBV) infected individuals cross-reacted in the ELISA assays and IFA, in one case generating a false positive result (may giving a false sense of security). This need to be further investigated.

Bibliographic Details

Niko Kohmer; Sandra Westhaus; Cornelia Rühl; Sandra Ciesek; Holger F. Rabenau

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology; Agricultural and Biological Sciences; Immunology and Microbiology; Neuroscience; Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics

Provide Feedback

Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know