Performance of the rapid high-throughput automated electrochemiluminescence immunoassay targeting total antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor binding domain in comparison to the neutralization assay.
Antibody
Electrochemiluminescence
Immunoassay
Neutralization
SARS-CoV-2
Journal
Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology
ISSN: 1873-5967
Titre abrégé: J Clin Virol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9815671
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2021
06 2021
Historique:
received:
17
01
2021
revised:
05
04
2021
accepted:
06
04
2021
pubmed:
18
4
2021
medline:
1
6
2021
entrez:
17
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Neutralization tests (NT) are the gold standard for detecting and quantifying anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (NAb), but their complexity restricts them to research settings or reference laboratories. Antibodies against S protein receptor binding domain (RBD) have been shown to confer a neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2. Assays quantitatively measuring anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could be of great value for NAb screening of potential donors for convalescent-phase plasma therapy, assessing natural or vaccine-induced immunity, stratifying individuals for vaccine receipt, and documenting vaccine response. Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (Elecsys-S), a high-throughput automated electrochemiluminescence double-antigen sandwich immunoassay for quantitative measurement of pan-anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, was evaluated against NT on 357 patients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. NT was performed in a BSL-3 laboratory using a Slovenian SARS-CoV-2 isolate; the NT titer ≥1:20 was considered positive. Elecsys-S detected pan-anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in 352/357 (98.6 %) samples. NAb were identified by NT in 257/357 (72 %) samples. The Elecsys-S/NT agreement was moderate (Cohen's kappa 0.56). High NT titer antibodies (≥1:160) were detected in 106/357 (30 %) samples. Elecsys-S's pan-anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations correlated with individual NT titer categories (the lowest concentrations were identified in NT-negative samples and the highest in samples with NT titer 1:1,280), and the Elecsys-S cutoff value for reasonable prediction of NAb generated after natural infection was established (133 BAU/mL). Although NT should remain the gold standard for assessing candidates for convalescent-phase plasma donors, selected commercial anti-SARS-CoV-2 assays with optimized cutoff, like Elecsys-S, could be used for rapid, automated, and large-scale screening of individuals with clinically relevant NAb levels as suitable donors.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Neutralization tests (NT) are the gold standard for detecting and quantifying anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (NAb), but their complexity restricts them to research settings or reference laboratories. Antibodies against S protein receptor binding domain (RBD) have been shown to confer a neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2. Assays quantitatively measuring anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could be of great value for NAb screening of potential donors for convalescent-phase plasma therapy, assessing natural or vaccine-induced immunity, stratifying individuals for vaccine receipt, and documenting vaccine response.
METHODS
Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (Elecsys-S), a high-throughput automated electrochemiluminescence double-antigen sandwich immunoassay for quantitative measurement of pan-anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, was evaluated against NT on 357 patients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. NT was performed in a BSL-3 laboratory using a Slovenian SARS-CoV-2 isolate; the NT titer ≥1:20 was considered positive.
RESULTS
Elecsys-S detected pan-anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in 352/357 (98.6 %) samples. NAb were identified by NT in 257/357 (72 %) samples. The Elecsys-S/NT agreement was moderate (Cohen's kappa 0.56). High NT titer antibodies (≥1:160) were detected in 106/357 (30 %) samples. Elecsys-S's pan-anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations correlated with individual NT titer categories (the lowest concentrations were identified in NT-negative samples and the highest in samples with NT titer 1:1,280), and the Elecsys-S cutoff value for reasonable prediction of NAb generated after natural infection was established (133 BAU/mL).
CONCLUSION
Although NT should remain the gold standard for assessing candidates for convalescent-phase plasma donors, selected commercial anti-SARS-CoV-2 assays with optimized cutoff, like Elecsys-S, could be used for rapid, automated, and large-scale screening of individuals with clinically relevant NAb levels as suitable donors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33865031
pii: S1386-6532(21)00087-1
doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2021.104820
pmc: PMC8035809
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Viral
0
Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus
0
spike protein, SARS-CoV-2
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
104820Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Références
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Sep 22;58(10):
pubmed: 32747400
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Dec 17;59(1):
pubmed: 33020186
Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Sep 12;:
pubmed: 32918466
J Clin Med. 2020 Dec 09;9(12):
pubmed: 33317059
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Dec 17;59(1):
pubmed: 33020185
Nature. 2020 Aug;584(7819):115-119
pubmed: 32454513
BMJ. 2020 Sep 8;370:m3325
pubmed: 32900692
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Dec 17;59(1):
pubmed: 33106364
BMJ. 2020 Jul 1;370:m2516
pubmed: 32611558
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 May 26;58(6):
pubmed: 32277022
J Infect Dis. 2020 Sep 14;222(8):1265-1269
pubmed: 32726417
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021 Jun;27(6):933-935
pubmed: 33450388
Rev Med Virol. 2021 May;31(3):e2181
pubmed: 33152146
J Infect Dis. 2021 Jan 4;223(1):10-14
pubmed: 33009908
Am J Clin Pathol. 2021 Feb 11;155(3):343-353
pubmed: 33155015
N Engl J Med. 2021 Mar 18;384(11):1015-1027
pubmed: 33523609
J Infect Dis. 2021 Jan 4;223(1):47-55
pubmed: 33104179
Am J Clin Pathol. 2021 Feb 4;155(2):267-279
pubmed: 33033840
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2014 Sep;34(5):502-8
pubmed: 24697967