• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Am J Clin Pathol . Differences in Performance Characteristics Among Four High-Throughput Assays for the Detection of Antibodies Against SARS-CoV-2 U

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Am J Clin Pathol


. 2020 Oct 9;aqaa200.
doi: 10.1093/ajcp/aqaa200. Online ahead of print.
Differences in Performance Characteristics Among Four High-Throughput Assays for the Detection of Antibodies Against SARS-CoV-2 Using a Common Set of Patient Samples


David M Manthei[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Jason F Whalen[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Lee F Schroeder[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Anthony M Sinay[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Shih-Hon Li[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Riccardo Valdez[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Donald A Giacherio[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Carmen Gherasim[SUP] 1 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Objectives: Serologic testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has experienced a changing landscape of available assays coupled with uncertainty surrounding performance characteristics. Studies are needed to directly compare multiple commercially available assays.
Methods: Residual serum samples were identified based on SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing, clinical test results, and collection dates. Serum samples were analyzed using assays from four different manufacturers: DiaSorin anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG, EUROIMMUN anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG ELISA, Roche Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2, and Siemens SARS-CoV-2 Total antibody assays.
Results: Samples from SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR-positive patients became increasingly positive as time from symptom onset increased. For patients with latest sample 14 or more days after symptom onset, sensitivities reached 93.1% to 96.6%, 98.3%, and 96.6% for EUROIMMUN, Roche, and Siemens assays, respectively, which were superior to the DiaSorin assay at 87.7%. The specificity of Roche and Siemens assays was 100% and superior to DiaSorin and EUROIMMUN assays, which ranged from 96.1% to 97.0% and 86.3% to 96.4%, respectively.
Conclusions: Laboratories should be aware of the advantages and limitations of serology testing options for SARS-CoV-2. The specificity and sensitivity achieved by the Roche and Siemens assays would be acceptable for testing in lower-prevalence regions and have the potential of orthogonal testing advantages if used in combination.

Keywords: COVID-19; Coronavirus; Immunoassay; SARS-CoV-2; Sensitivity; Serology; Specificity.
 
Back
Top Bottom