Department of Laboratory Medicine, Hospital St. Georg, Leipzig, Germany; ImmunoDeficiencyCenter Leipzig (IDCL) at Hospital St. Georg Leipzig, Jeffrey Modell Diagnostic and Research Center for Primary Immunodeficiency Diseases, Leipzig, Germany.
Institute of Laboratory Medicine, Clinical Chemistry and Molecular Diagnostics, Medical Faculty of the University and University Hospital, Leipzig, Germany.
Clin Chim Acta. 2020 Dec;511:352-359. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2020.10.035. Epub 2020 Nov 5.
Serological severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody assays differ in the target antigen specificity, e.g. of antibodies directed against the viral spike or the nucleocapsid protein, and in the spectrum of detected immunoglobulins. The aim of the study was to evaluate the performance of two different routinely used immunoassays in hospitalized and outpatient COVID-19 cases.
The test characteristics of commercially available spike1 protein-based serological assays (Euroimmun, EI-assays), determining IgA or IgG and nucleocapsid-based assays (Virotech, VT-assays) determining IgA, IgM or IgG were compared in 139 controls and 116 hospitalized and outpatient COVID-19 cases.
Hospitalized COVID-19 patients (n = 51; 115 samples) showed significantly higher concentrations of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 and differed from outpatient cases (n = 65) by higher age, higher disease severity scores and earlier follow up blood sampling. Sensitivity of the two IgG assays was comparable in hospitalized patients tested ≥ 14 days (EI-assay: 88%, CI 67.6-99.9; VT-assay: 96%, CI 77.7-99.8). In outpatient COVID-19 cases sensitivity was significantly lower in the VT-assay (86.2%, CI 74.8-93.1) compared with the EI-assay (98.5%, CI 90.6-99.9). Assays for IgA and IgM demonstrated a lack of specificity or sensitivity.
Our results indicate that SARS-CoV-2 serological assays may need to be optimized to produce reliable results in outpatient COVID-19 cases who are low or even asymptomatic. Assays for IgA and IgM have limited diagnostic performance and do not prove an additional value for population-based screening approaches.
血清严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)抗体检测在目标抗原特异性方面存在差异,例如针对病毒刺突或核衣壳蛋白的抗体,以及检测到的免疫球蛋白谱方面存在差异。本研究旨在评估两种不同的常规使用的免疫测定法在住院和门诊 COVID-19 病例中的性能。
比较了两种市售的基于刺突 1 蛋白的血清学检测(Euroimmun,EI 检测),可测定 IgA 或 IgG 和基于核衣壳的检测(Virotech,VT 检测),可测定 IgA、IgM 或 IgG,共纳入 139 例对照和 116 例住院和门诊 COVID-19 病例。
住院 COVID-19 患者(n=51;115 份样本)显示出针对 SARS-CoV-2 的抗体浓度明显更高,与门诊病例(n=65)相比,年龄更大,疾病严重程度评分更高,且更早进行随访采血。在≥14 天接受检测的住院患者中,两种 IgG 检测的敏感性相当(EI 检测:88%,CI 67.6-99.9;VT 检测:96%,CI 77.7-99.8)。在门诊 COVID-19 病例中,VT 检测的敏感性明显低于 EI 检测(86.2%,CI 74.8-93.1)。IgA 和 IgM 的检测缺乏特异性或敏感性。
我们的结果表明,SARS-CoV-2 血清学检测可能需要进行优化,以便在门诊 COVID-19 病例中产生可靠的结果,这些病例的病情较低或甚至无症状。IgA 和 IgM 的检测具有有限的诊断性能,并且对基于人群的筛查方法没有证明额外的价值。