PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Jääskeläinen, AJ AU - Kuivanen, S AU - Kekäläinen, E AU - Ahava, MJ AU - Loginov, R AU - Kallio-Kokko, H AU - Vapalahti, O AU - Jarva, H AU - Kurkela, S AU - Lappalainen, M TI - Performance of six SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays in comparison with microneutralisation AID - 10.1101/2020.05.18.20101618 DP - 2020 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2020.05.18.20101618 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/22/2020.05.18.20101618.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/22/2020.05.18.20101618.full AB - There is an urgent need for reliable high-throughput serological assays for the management of the ongoing COVID–19 pandemic. Preferably, the performance of serological tests for a novel virus should be determined with clinical specimens against a gold standard, i.e. virus neutralisation.We evaluated specificity and sensitivity of six commercial immunoassays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 IgG, IgA and IgM antibodies, including four automated assays [Abbott SARS-COV-2 IgG (CE marked), Diasorin Liaison® SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG (research use only), and Euroimmun SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA (CE marked)], and two rapid lateral flow (immunocromatographic) tests [Acro Biotech 2019-nCoV IgG/IgM (CE marked) and Xiamen Biotime Biotechnology SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM (CE marked)] in comparison with a microneutralisation test (MNT). Two specimen panels from serum samples sent to Helsinki University Hospital Laboratory (HUSLAB) were compiled: the patient panel included sera from PCR confirmed COVID–19 patients, and the negative panel included sera sent for screening of autoimmune diseases and respiratory virus antibodies in 2018 and 2019. The MNT was carried out for all COVID–19 samples (70 serum samples, 62 individuals) and for 53 samples from the negative panel. Forty-one out of 62 COVID–19 patients showed neutralising antibodies with median of 11 days (range 3–51) after onset of symptoms.The specificity and sensitivity values of the commercial tests against MNT, respectively, were as follows: 95.1%/80.5% (Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG), 94.9%/43.8% (Diasorin Liaison SARS-CoV-2 IgG), 68.3%/87.8% (Euroimmun SARS-CoV-2 IgA), 86.6%/70.7% (Euroimmun SARS-CoV-2 IgG), 74.4%/56.1% (Acro 2019-nCoV IgG), 69.5%/46.3% (Acro 2019-nCoV IgM), 97.5%/71.9% (Xiamen Biotime SARS-CoV-2 IgG), and 88.8%/81.3% (Xiamen Biotime SARSCoV-2 IgM). This study shows variable performance values. Laboratories should carefully consider their testing process, such as a two-tier approach, in order to optimize the overall performance of SARS-CoV-2 serodiagnostics.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialAll patients and data were treated anonymously and according to research permit of HUS/32/2018 (Helsinki University Hospital, Finland).Funding StatementFunded by Helsinki University Hospital, HUSLAB, Helsinki, Finland (KLIMIK)Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesAll 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.YesAll data is available