Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Anti-Spike protein assays to determine post-vaccination antibody levels: a head-to-head comparison of five quantitative assays

View ORCID ProfileThomas Perkmann, View ORCID ProfileNicole Perkmann-Nagele, Thomas Koller, Patrick Mucher, Astrid Radakovics, View ORCID ProfileRodrig Marculescu, View ORCID ProfileMichael Wolzt, Oswald F. Wagner, View ORCID ProfileChristoph J. Binder, View ORCID ProfileHelmuth Haslacher
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.05.21252977
Thomas Perkmann
1Department of Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Thomas Perkmann
Nicole Perkmann-Nagele
1Department of Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Nicole Perkmann-Nagele
Thomas Koller
1Department of Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Patrick Mucher
1Department of Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Astrid Radakovics
1Department of Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rodrig Marculescu
1Department of Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Rodrig Marculescu
Michael Wolzt
2Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Michael Wolzt
Oswald F. Wagner
1Department of Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christoph J. Binder
1Department of Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Christoph J. Binder
Helmuth Haslacher
1Department of Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Helmuth Haslacher
  • For correspondence: helmuth.haslacher{at}meduniwien.ac.at
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Reliable quantification of the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is highly relevant for identifying possible vaccine failure and estimating the time of protection. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the performance of five different Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays regarding the quantification of anti-spike (S) antibodies induced after a single dose of BNT162b2.

Methods Sera of n=69 SARS-CoV-2 naïve individuals 21±1 days after vaccination with BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) were tested using the following quantitative SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays: Roche S total antibody, DiaSorin trimeric spike IgG, DiaSorin S1/S2 IgG, Abbott II IgG, and Serion/Virion IgG. Test agreement was assessed by Passing-Bablok regression. Results were further compared to the percent inhibition calculated from a surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) by correlation and ROC (receiver-operating-characteristics) analysis.

Results Individual values were distributed over several orders of magnitude for all assays evaluated. Although the assays were in good overall agreement (ρ=0.80-0.94), Passing-Bablok regression revealed systematic and proportional differences, which could not be eliminated by converting the results to BAU/mL as suggested by the manufacturers. 7 (10%) individuals had a negative sVNT results (i.e. <30% inhibition). These samples were reliably identified by most assays and yielded low binding antibody levels (ROC-AUCs 0.84-0.93).

Conclusions Although all assays evaluated showed good correlation, readings from different assays were not interchangeable, even when converted to BAU/mL using the WHO international standard for SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin. This highlights the need for further standardization of SARS-CoV-2 serology.

Competing Interest Statement

NP received a travel grant from DiaSorin. The Dept. of Laboratory Medicine received compensations for advertisement on scientific symposia from Roche, DiaSorin and Abbott, and holds a grant for evaluating an in-vitro diagnostic device from Roche. The GenScript sVNT test kit and the Serion IgG kit were kindly provided by the respective supplier (medac GmbH and DiaChrom), the Abbott S IgG kit and the DiaSorin TriS IgG kit were kindly provided by the manufacturers.

Funding Statement

The GenScript sVNT test kit and the Serion IgG kit were kindly provided by the respective supplier (medac GmbH and DiaChrom), the Abbott S IgG kit and the DiaSorin TriS IgG kit were kindly provided by the manufacturers. There was no additional funding received for the present work.

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 study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Medical University of Vienna (EK1066/2021). All participants provided written informed consent to donate blood for the evaluation of diagnostic test systems (EK404/2012).

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

Data is available to interested researchers upon request from the corresponding author.

  • Abbreviations

    SARS-CoV-2
    Severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2
    COVID-19
    Coronavirus Disease 19
    NC
    Nucleocapsid
    S
    Spike protein
    tAb
    total antibody
    ECLIA
    electrochemiluminescence immunoassay
    RBD
    receptor binding domain
    CMIA
    chemiluminescence microparticle assay
    CLIA
    chemiluminescence immunoassay
    ELISA
    enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
    BAU/Ml
    binding antibody units per milliliter
    sVNT
    surrogate virus neutralization test
    ROC-AUC
    receiver-operating-charateristics area under the curve
  • Copyright 
    The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.
    Back to top
    PreviousNext
    Posted March 08, 2021.
    Download PDF

    Supplementary Material

    Data/Code
    Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

    NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Anti-Spike protein assays to determine post-vaccination antibody levels: a head-to-head comparison of five quantitative assays
    (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Share
    Anti-Spike protein assays to determine post-vaccination antibody levels: a head-to-head comparison of five quantitative assays
    Thomas Perkmann, Nicole Perkmann-Nagele, Thomas Koller, Patrick Mucher, Astrid Radakovics, Rodrig Marculescu, Michael Wolzt, Oswald F. Wagner, Christoph J. Binder, Helmuth Haslacher
    medRxiv 2021.03.05.21252977; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.05.21252977
    Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
    Citation Tools
    Anti-Spike protein assays to determine post-vaccination antibody levels: a head-to-head comparison of five quantitative assays
    Thomas Perkmann, Nicole Perkmann-Nagele, Thomas Koller, Patrick Mucher, Astrid Radakovics, Rodrig Marculescu, Michael Wolzt, Oswald F. Wagner, Christoph J. Binder, Helmuth Haslacher
    medRxiv 2021.03.05.21252977; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.05.21252977

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    Subject Area

    • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS)
    Subject Areas
    All Articles
    • Addiction Medicine (434)
    • Allergy and Immunology (760)
    • Anesthesia (222)
    • Cardiovascular Medicine (3316)
    • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (366)
    • Dermatology (282)
    • Emergency Medicine (480)
    • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (1175)
    • Epidemiology (13403)
    • Forensic Medicine (19)
    • Gastroenterology (900)
    • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (5182)
    • Geriatric Medicine (483)
    • Health Economics (786)
    • Health Informatics (3286)
    • Health Policy (1146)
    • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (1199)
    • Hematology (432)
    • HIV/AIDS (1024)
    • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (14657)
    • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (917)
    • Medical Education (478)
    • Medical Ethics (128)
    • Nephrology (526)
    • Neurology (4957)
    • Nursing (263)
    • Nutrition (735)
    • Obstetrics and Gynecology (889)
    • Occupational and Environmental Health (797)
    • Oncology (2531)
    • Ophthalmology (730)
    • Orthopedics (284)
    • Otolaryngology (348)
    • Pain Medicine (323)
    • Palliative Medicine (90)
    • Pathology (547)
    • Pediatrics (1308)
    • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (552)
    • Primary Care Research (559)
    • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (4225)
    • Public and Global Health (7526)
    • Radiology and Imaging (1717)
    • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (1022)
    • Respiratory Medicine (982)
    • Rheumatology (480)
    • Sexual and Reproductive Health (500)
    • Sports Medicine (425)
    • Surgery (551)
    • Toxicology (73)
    • Transplantation (237)
    • Urology (206)