ABSTRACT
Purpose Assessment of commercial SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays for their capacity to provide reliable information on sera neutralizing activity is an emerging need. We evaluated the performance of two commercially-available lateral flow immunochromatographic assays (LFIC) (Wondfo SARS-CoV-2 Antibody test and the INNOVITA 2019-nCoV Ab test) in comparison with a SARS-CoV-2 neutralization pseudotyped assay for COVID-19 diagnosis in hospitalized patients, and investigate whether the intensity of the test band in LFIC associates with neutralizing antibody (NtAb) titers.
Patients and Methods Ninety sera were included from 51 patients with moderate to severe COVID-19. A green fluorescent protein (GFP) reporter-based pseudotyped neutralization assay (vesicular stomatitis virus coated with SARS-CoV-2 spike protein) was used. Test line intensity was scored using a 4-level scale (0 to 3+).
Results Overall sensitivity of LFIC assays was 91.1% for the Wondfo SARS-CoV-2 Antibody test, 72.2% for the INNOVITA 2019-nCoV IgG, 85.6% for the INNOVITA 2019-nCoV IgM and 92.2% for the NtAb assay. Sensitivity increased for all assays in sera collected beyond day 14 after symptoms onset (93.9%, 79.6%,93.9% and 93.9%, respectively). Reactivities equal to or more intense than the positive control line (≥2+) in the Wondfo assay had a negative predictive value of 100% and a positive predictive value of 96.4% for high NtAb50 titers (≥1/160).
Conclusions Our findings support the use of LFIC assays evaluated herein, particularly the Wondfo test, for COVID-19 diagnosis. We also find evidence that these rapid immunoassays can be used to predict high SARS-CoV-2-S NtAb50 titers.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by Valencian Government grant IDIFEDER/2018/056 to JRD, Generalitat Valenciana grant Covid_19-SCI to RG-R, Spanish National Research Council grant CSIC-COV19-082 and Fondo Supera Covid-19 grant BlockAce to RG-R
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The current study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Hospital Clinico Universitario INCLIVA (March, 2020).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos