Diagnostic Properties of Three SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Tests

Abstract

Serological assays emerged as complementary tools to RT-PCR in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 as well as being needed for epidemiological studies. This study aimed to assess the performance of a rapid test (RT) compared to that of serological tests using finger prick blood samples. A total of 183 samples were evaluated, 88 of which were collected from individuals with negative RT-PCR and 95 from positive RT-PCR individuals. The diagnostic performance of RT (WONDFO®) and LUMIT (PROMEGA®) were compared to that of ELISA (EUROIMMUN®) for detecting antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 according to time from symptoms onset. The IgG antibody tests were detected in 77.4% (LUMIT), 77.9% (RT), and 80.0% (ELISA) of individuals. The detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 increases in accordance with increasing time from symptoms onset. Considering only time from symptoms onset >21 days, the positivity rate ranged from 81.8 to 97.0% between the three tests. The RT and LUMIT showed high agreement with ELISA (agreement = 91.5%, k = 0.83, and agreement = 96.3%, k = 0.9, respectively) in individuals who had symptoms 15 to 21 days before sample collection. Compared to that of the ELISA assay, our results show sensitivity ranged from 95% to 100% for IgG antibody detection in individuals with symptoms onset between 15 and 21 days before sample collection. The specificity was 100% in individuals with symptoms onset >15 days before serological tests. This study shows good performance and high level of agreement of three immunoassays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

Longitudinal profile of antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in patients with COVID-19 in a setting from Sub–Saharan Africa: A prospective longitudinal study

“…The findings revealed that antibody responses were highly heterogeneous between individuals and assays, consistent with previous reports [ 21 – 28 ]. Comparable trends in antibody response kinetics observed between the different assays suggest that the different antigen targets (NP, N and S) were similarly immunogenic.…”

Lateral Flow Immunoassay of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen with SERS-Based Registration: Development and Comparison with Traditional Immunoassays

“…Rapid lateral flow assay is a valuable tool for diagnosing and monitoring various diseases [ 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 ]. To date, rapid diagnostics of COVID-19 to determine the antigen and the presence of IgG/IgM antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 to prevent the spread of the virus is carried out using lateral flow tests [ 43 , 44 ]. In parallel, other methods of virus identification are being developed, including electrochemical sensors, colorimetric tests, and SERS sensors [ 45 , 46 , 47 ].…”

A homogeneous bioluminescent immunoassay for parallel characterization of binding between a panel of antibodies and a family of Fcγ receptors

“…Apart from being solution-based, these assays eliminate any washing steps and are therefore easy and rapid. Immunoassays using NanoBiT technology have been used in multiple application such as the detection of protein interactions, SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection and neutralization assays, as well as in the development of Fc/FcRn interactions among others 18 – 21 . In this work, we leveraged the approach used in measuring Fc/FcRn interactions and describe assay for the measurement of Fc interaction with family of six Fcγ receptors namely—FcγRI, FcγRIIa (H131), FcγRIIa (R131), FcγRIIb, FcγRIIIa (V158), and FcγRIIIa (F158) (Fig.…”