Abstract
With the availability of vaccines, commercial assays detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (Ab) evolved towards quantitative assays directed to the spike glycoprotein or its receptor binding domain (RBD). The main objective of the present study was to compare the Ab titers obtained with quantitative commercial binding Ab assays, after 1 dose (convalescent individuals) or 2 doses (naive individuals) of vaccine, in healthcare workers (HCW).
Antibody titers were measured in 263 sera (from 150 HCW) with 5 quantitative immunoassays (Abbott RBD IgG II quant, bioMerieux RBD IgG, DiaSorin Trimeric spike IgG, Siemens Healthineers RBD IgG, Wantai RBD IgG). One qualitative total antibody anti RBD detection assay (Wantai) was used to detect previous infection before vaccination. The results are presented in binding Ab units (BAU)/mL after application, when possible, of a conversion factor provided by the manufacturers and established from a World Health Organization (WHO) internal standard.
There was a 100% seroconversion with all assays evaluated after two doses of vaccine. With assays allowing BAU/ml correction, Ab titers were correlated (ρ= 0.84-0.99). However, a significant difference between values persisted. The titer differences varied by a mean 3.04% between Siemens and bioMerieux assays to 50.54% between Siemens and DiaSorin assays.
Titer harmonization is still to be improved despite better results were obtained between assays detecting the same Ab against the same antigen. The next step towards a true standardization of the assays would be to include the International Standard in the calibration of each assays to express the results in IU/mL.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT04341142
Clinical Protocols
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33234651/
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:
Concerning COVID-19 patients, written informed consent was obtained from all participants; ethics 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), and the study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04341142).
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 that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, STA, upon reasonable request.