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

Evaluation of serological tests for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: implementation in assessing post vaccination status

Sally A. Mahmoud, Subhashini Ganesan, Shivaraj Naik, Safaa Bissar, Isra Zamil, Walid Abbas Zaher
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.27.21256205
Sally A. Mahmoud
1Biogenix Lab G42, Abu Dhabi, UAE
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: sally.abdulla{at}g42.ai
Subhashini Ganesan
2G42 Healthcare, UAE
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shivaraj Naik
1Biogenix Lab G42, Abu Dhabi, UAE
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Safaa Bissar
1Biogenix Lab G42, Abu Dhabi, UAE
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Isra Zamil
1Biogenix Lab G42, Abu Dhabi, UAE
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Walid Abbas Zaher
2G42 Healthcare, UAE
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background The anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunological assays have promising applications in the control and surveillance of the current COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, large number of serological assays are developed in the commercial market to measure SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, which requires evaluation before their application in large scale.

Objectives To evaluate the performances of commercially available serological assays for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

Methods The study compared the performances of six different methods for detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 which includes (i) Genscript SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus neutralization test kit [Test A] (ii) Diasorin - SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG detection [Test B] (iii) Alinity SARS-CoV-2 IgG II [Test C] (iv) Diasorin – SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG [Test D] (v) Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 – cobas [Test E] (vi) AESKULISA (AESKU Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay) [Test F] against the gold standard Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT).

Results Test E had the highest sensitivity and Test A had the highest specificity The ROC for tests A, C, D and E showed optimum cut-offs that differed from the manufacturer’s recommendation. Test D had the best performance considering all the performance indicators with the highest agreement with the PRNT results. Parallel testing of test A with test D and test B had the optimum performance.

Conclusion Serological assays that are commercially available are very promising and show good agreement with the standard PRNT results. Studies on large samples for optimization of the assay cut-off values and cost-effective evaluations on parallel testing methods are needed to make recommendations on these commercial assays.

Importance Serological assays that are commercially available are very promising and this paper adds new knowledge about the optimization of these kits for evaluating post vaccination antibodies status. It highlights the positive and negative aspects of each of these assays in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and the agreement of results with the standard neutralization test. When serological assays are being used to assess post-vaccine immune status, a balance of all parameters needs to be considered rather than emphasizing only on high specificity. This is particularly relevant in the current situation where vaccination is happening around the globe, high sensitivity assays will result in reporting a lower percentage of false negative reports and avoids panic about lack of vaccine response. It is important that we understand the strengths and limitations of commercially available serological assays for better application of these tests to understand immune response and the duration of protection post vaccination.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

The study was not funded by any funding body, it was done in Biogenix lab as a part of research.

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 Ethics approval was obtained from Department of Health (DOH) Institutional review board (IRB), Abu Dhabi. All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.

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

The data is available with the corresponding author, Dr. Sally, Director of Biogenix G42 lab and will be produced on request

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 April 30, 2021.
Download PDF
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.
Evaluation of serological tests for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: implementation in assessing post vaccination status
(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
Evaluation of serological tests for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: implementation in assessing post vaccination status
Sally A. Mahmoud, Subhashini Ganesan, Shivaraj Naik, Safaa Bissar, Isra Zamil, Walid Abbas Zaher
medRxiv 2021.04.27.21256205; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.27.21256205
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Evaluation of serological tests for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: implementation in assessing post vaccination status
Sally A. Mahmoud, Subhashini Ganesan, Shivaraj Naik, Safaa Bissar, Isra Zamil, Walid Abbas Zaher
medRxiv 2021.04.27.21256205; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.27.21256205

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 (430)
  • Allergy and Immunology (756)
  • Anesthesia (221)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (3297)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (364)
  • Dermatology (280)
  • Emergency Medicine (479)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (1171)
  • Epidemiology (13381)
  • Forensic Medicine (19)
  • Gastroenterology (899)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (5155)
  • Geriatric Medicine (482)
  • Health Economics (783)
  • Health Informatics (3271)
  • Health Policy (1142)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (1192)
  • Hematology (432)
  • HIV/AIDS (1018)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (14632)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (913)
  • Medical Education (477)
  • Medical Ethics (127)
  • Nephrology (524)
  • Neurology (4928)
  • Nursing (262)
  • Nutrition (730)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (883)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (795)
  • Oncology (2524)
  • Ophthalmology (726)
  • Orthopedics (281)
  • Otolaryngology (347)
  • Pain Medicine (323)
  • Palliative Medicine (90)
  • Pathology (543)
  • Pediatrics (1302)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (551)
  • Primary Care Research (557)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (4216)
  • Public and Global Health (7507)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1706)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (1014)
  • Respiratory Medicine (980)
  • Rheumatology (480)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (498)
  • Sports Medicine (424)
  • Surgery (548)
  • Toxicology (72)
  • Transplantation (236)
  • Urology (205)