RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Evaluation of four commercial, fully automated SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests suggests a revision of the Siemens SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.11.27.20239590
DO 10.1101/2020.11.27.20239590
A1 Irsara, Christian
A1 Egger, Alexander E.
A1 Prokop, Wolfgang
A1 Nairz, Manfred
A1 Loacker, Lorin
A1 Sahanic, Sabina
A1 Sonnweber, Thomas
A1 Mayer, Wolfgang
A1 Schennach, Harald
A1 Loeffler-Ragg, Judith
A1 Bellmann-Weiler, Rosa
A1 Tancevski, Ivan
A1 Weiss, Günter
A1 Anliker, Markus
A1 Griesmacher, Andrea
A1 Hoermann, Gregor
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/12/02/2020.11.27.20239590.abstract
AB Objectives Serological tests detect antibodies against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the ongoing coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. Independent external clinical validation of performance characteristics is of paramount importance.Methods Four fully automated assays, Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2, Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Siemens SARS-CoV-2 total (COV2T) and SARS-CoV-2 IgG (COV2G) were evaluated using 350 pre-pandemic samples and 700 samples from 245 COVID-19 patients (158 hospitalized, 87 outpatients).Results All tests showed very high diagnostic specificity. Sensitivities in samples collected at least 14 days after disease onset were slightly lower than manufacturers’ claims for Roche (93.04%), Abbott (90.83%), and Siemens COV2T (90.26%), and distinctly lower for Siemens COV2G (78.76%). Concordantly negative results were enriched for immunocompromised patients. ROC curve analyses suggest a lowering of the cut-off index for the Siemens COV2G assay. Finally, the combination of two anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays is feasible when considering borderline reactive results.Conclusions Thorough on-site evaluation of commercially available serologic tests for detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 remains imperative for laboratories. The potentially impaired sensitivity of the Siemens COV2G necessitates a switch to the company’s newly filed SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay (sCOVG) for follow-up studies. A combination of tests could be considered in clinical practice.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding Statementno external fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Approved by the ethics committee of the Medical University of Innsbruck (ethics commission numbers: 1103/2020, 1167/2020All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesSee section supplemental dataCIconfidence intervalCLIAchemiluminescence immunoassayCOIcut-off indexCOVID-19Coronavirus disease 2019ELISAenzyme-linked immunosorbent assayLFIAlateral flow immunoassayICUintensive care unitIgImmunoglobulinIQRinterquartile rangeROCreceiver operating characteristicRT-PCRreverse transcription polymerase chain reaction