An evaluation of COVID-19 serological assays informs future diagnostics and exposure assessment.
Antibodies, Neutralizing
/ blood
Antibodies, Viral
/ blood
Betacoronavirus
COVID-19
COVID-19 Testing
Clinical Laboratory Techniques
Coronavirus Infections
/ diagnosis
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay
High-Throughput Screening Assays
Humans
Luminescent Measurements
Neutralization Tests
Pandemics
Pneumonia, Viral
/ diagnosis
SARS-CoV-2
Sensitivity and Specificity
Serologic Tests
/ standards
Journal
Nature communications
ISSN: 2041-1723
Titre abrégé: Nat Commun
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101528555
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 07 2020
06 07 2020
Historique:
received:
27
05
2020
accepted:
25
06
2020
entrez:
8
7
2020
pubmed:
8
7
2020
medline:
14
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The world is entering a new era of the COVID-19 pandemic in which there is an increasing call for reliable antibody testing. To support decision making on the deployment of serology for either population screening or diagnostics, we present a detailed comparison of serological COVID-19 assays. We show that among the selected assays there is a wide diversity in assay performance in different scenarios and when correlated to virus neutralizing antibodies. The Wantai ELISA detecting total immunoglobulins against the receptor binding domain of SARS CoV-2, has the best overall characteristics to detect functional antibodies in different stages and severity of disease, including the potential to set a cut-off indicating the presence of protective antibodies. The large variety of available serological assays requires proper assay validation before deciding on deployment of assays for specific applications.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32632160
doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-17317-y
pii: 10.1038/s41467-020-17317-y
pmc: PMC7338506
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Neutralizing
0
Antibodies, Viral
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3436Références
Kissler S. M., Tedijanto C., Goldstein E., Grad Y. H., Lipsitch M. Projecting the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 through the postpandemic period. Science 368, 860–868 (2020).
doi: 10.1126/science.abb5793
Long Q. X., et al. Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients with COVID-19. Nat. Med. 26, 845–848 (2020).
Okba N. M. A., et al. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-specific antibody responses in coronavirus disease 2019 patients. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 26, 1478–1488 (2020).
doi: 10.3201/eid2607.200841
Bryant J. E., et al. Serology for SARS-CoV-2: apprehensions, opportunities, and the path forward. Sci. Immunol. 5, eabc6347 (2020).
doi: 10.1126/sciimmunol.abc6347
Zhao J., et al. Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel coronavirus disease 2019. Clin. Infect. Dis. pii: ciaa344, (2020). [Epub ahead of print].
Choe, P. G. et al. MERS-CoV antibody responses 1 year after symptom onset, South Korea, 2015. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 23, 1079–1084 (2017).
doi: 10.3201/eid2307.170310
Slot E., et al. Herd immunity is not a realistic exit strategy during a COVID-19 outbreak. Nature Res. https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-25862/v1 (2020).
Lassaunière R., et al. Evaluation of nine commercial SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.09.20056325v1 (2020).