RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 A simple, sensitive and quantitative FACS-based test for SARS-CoV-2 serology in humans and animals
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.09.06.21262027
DO 10.1101/2021.09.06.21262027
A1 Agnès Maurel Ribes
A1 Pierre Bessière
A1 Jean Charles Guéry
A1 Eloïse Joly Featherstone
A1 Timothée Bruel
A1 Remy Robinot
A1 Olivier Schwartz
A1 Romain Volmer
A1 Florence Abravanel
A1 Jacques Izopet
A1 Etienne Joly
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/03/25/2021.09.06.21262027.abstract
AB Serological tests are important for understanding the physiopathology and following the evolution of the Covid-19 pandemic. Assays based on flow cytometry (FACS) of tissue culture cells expressing the spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2 have repeatedly proven to perform slightly better than the plate-based assays ELISA and CLIA (chemiluminescent immuno-assay), and markedly better than lateral flow immuno-assays (LFIA).Here, we describe an optimized and very simple FACS assay based on staining a mix of two Jurkat cell lines, expressing either high levels of the S protein (Jurkat-S) or a fluorescent protein (Jurkat-R expressing m-Cherry, or Jurkat-G, expressing GFP, which serve as an internal negative control). We show that the Jurkat-S&R-flow test has a much broader dynamic range than a commercial ELISA test and performs at least as well in terms of sensitivity and specificity. Also, it is more sensitive and quantitative than the hemagglutination-based test HAT, which we described recently. The Jurkat-flow test requires only a few microliters of blood; thus, it can be used to quantify various Ig isotypes in capillary blood collected from a finger prick. It can be used also to evaluate serological responses in mice, hamsters, cats and dogs. Whilst the Jurkat-flow test is ill-suited and not intended for clinical use, it offers a very attractive solution for laboratories with access to tissue culture and flow cytometry who want to monitor serological responses in humans or in animals, and how these relate to susceptibility to infection, or re-infection, by the virus, and to protection against Covid-19.Note This manuscript has been refereed by Review Commons, and modified thanks to the comments and suggestions from two referees. Those comments, and our replies, are provided at the end of the manuscript’s pdf, and can also be accessed by clicking on the box with a little green number found just above the “Abstract “ tab in the medRXiv window.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe first part of this project was funded by a private donation. The second part was funded by the ANR grant HAT-field to EJ. EJ is employed by INSERM.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:All sera from the first cohort, and whole blood samples from the second cohort, were obtained from the Toulouse hospital, where all patients give, by default, their consent for any biological material left over to be used for research purposes after all the clinical tests requested by doctors have been duly completed. Material transfer was done under a signed agreement (CNRS n 227232, CHU n 20 427 C). This study was declared and approved by the governing body of the Toulouse University Hospital with the agreement number RnIPH 2021-99, confirming that ethical requirements were fully respected. I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.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).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.YesAll data used for generating the figures are included as supplementary material. All other data can be obtained by request from the corresponding author.