RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Harmonization of SARS CoV-2 antibodies determination. Is it really possible?
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.12.13.21267669
DO 10.1101/2021.12.13.21267669
A1 Dittadi, Ruggero
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/14/2021.12.13.21267669.abstract
AB The WHO standard was prepared with the aim of harmonizing assays detecting antibodies against SARS CoV-2. The aspect of the harmonization of the assays is to date under debate. We re-evaluated a previously studied set of cases (108 specimens of 48 patients and 60 specimens of 20 vaccinated subjects, collected after 14 days from the first dose, 14 days and 3 months after a second dose of the Comirnaty BNT162b2 vaccine), calculating the ratios between the results of two methods (SARS-CoV-2 IgG anti-RBD, SNIBE and anti-SARS-CoV-2 QuantiVac ELISA IgG, Euroimmun).In the vaccinated subjects the ratios of the results between methods according to the WHO standard were relatively dispersed, but the harmonization results good. On the other hand, in patient samples the variability between tests was very high and the harmonization was unsatisfactory (median ratios between methods 2.23, 10th-90th percentile: 1.1-5.6).Interestingly, in patient samples the harmonization depends on the time from the onset of symptoms, and greatly improves after 6 months from the diagnosis. 40 patient specimens and 31 of vaccinated subjects after the second dose were evaluated also with a third method (Access SARS-CoV-2 IgG (1st IS), Beckman Coulter), obtaining a similar trend.We can conclude that the actual effectiveness of harmonization between methods may vary depending on the scenario in which they will be used.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any 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:The Ethical committee for clinical trials, ULSS3 Serenissima, Venice, approved the study (Approval n.149/A CESC).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.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.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors