Abstract
Background The association between SARS-CoV-2 commercial serological assays and virus neutralization test (VNT) has been poorly explored in mild COVID-19 patients.
Methods A total of 439 specimens were longitudinally collected from 76 healthcare workers with RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19. Nine serological assays developed by leading global companies (Abbott, DiaSorin, Siemens, Bio-Rad, Wantai, bioMérieux, Euroimmun) were evaluated. For each test the sensitivity to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was determined weekly after symptom onset. Correlation and concordance with the VNT were assessed using the Spearman and Cohen’s Kappa coefficients, respectively. Positive percent agreement and negative percent agreement (NPA) were also determined.
Results The Wantai Total Ab assay targeting the receptor binding domain (RBD) within the S protein presented the best sensitivity at different times during the course of disease. The best correlation between antibody level and neutralizing antibody titer was found with the Euroimmun S1-based IgA assay (Spearman coefficient [95%CI]: 0.71 [0.62-0.79]). A moderate concordance (Kappa [95%CI]: 0.43 [0.23-0.63]) as well as the lowest NPA (33%) was found between the Wantai Total Ab assay and the VNT. Compared to the Wantai Total Ab assay, other total Ab or IgG assays targeting the S or the RBD (bioMérieux, DiaSorin, Siemens,) were more concordant with the VNT (Kappa>0.7 for the three tests) and had a higher NPA (range: 90% to 97%).
Conclusions Although some assays presented a better concordance with VNT than others, the present findings emphasize that commercialized serological tests including those targeting the RBD cannot substitute a VNT for the assessment of functional antibody response.
Competing Interest Statement
Antonin Bal has received grant from bioMerieux and has served as consultant for bioMerieux for work and research not related to this manuscript. Sophie Trouillet-Assant has received research grant from bioMerieux concerning previous works not related to this manuscript. The other authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript.
Clinical Trial
NCT04341142
Funding Statement
This research is being supported by Hospices Civils de Lyon and by Fondation des Hospices Civils de Lyon.
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:
Written informed consent was obtained from all participants, approval was obtained from the national review board for biomedical research in April 2020 (Comite de Protection des Personnes Sud Mediterranee I, Marseille, France; ID RCB 2020-A00932-37)
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
Data Availability
All data are available in the manuscript
