Back

A High Through-put Assay for Circulating Antibodies Directed against the S Protein of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Corona virus 2

Weiss, S.; Klingler, J.; Hioe, C.; Amanat, F.; Baine, I.; Kojic, E. M.; Stoever, J.; Liu, S.; Jurczyszak, D.; Bermudez-Gonzalez, M.; Simon, V.; Krammer, F.; Zolla-Pazner, S.

2020-04-17 infectious diseases
10.1101/2020.04.14.20059501
Show abstract

BackgroundMore than one million infections with the severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been confirmed. While PCR-based assays are used for diagnosis, high through-put serologic methods are needed to detect antibodies for seroserveillance and for identification of seroconversion, potential plasma donors, and the nature of the immune response to this pathogen. MethodsA Luminex binding assay was used to assess the presence of antibodies in human sera from COVID-19-infected and -uninfected individuals specific for two recombinant proteins of SARS-CoV-2. FindingsFluorochrome-labeled beads were coated with a recombinant soluble stabilized trimeric SARS-CoV-2 S protein ectodomain or its central portion, the receptor binding domain (RBD). Coated beads were incubated with sera, followed by incubation with biotinylated anti-human total Ig antibodies and phycoerythrin (PE)-labeled streptavidin. Readout using a Luminex analyzer clearly differentiated between sera of the infected and uninfected subjects, delineating a wide range of serum antibody levels in infected subjects. InterpretationAntibody assays of sera can identify individuals who are infected with SARS-CoV-2 and have seroconverted, as well as subjects who have been infected and recovered. The use of the Luminex binding Ab assay has the advantage that it can be run in approximately 2.5 hours, uses very little antigen, and permits a high through-put of samples/day. FundingNIAID contracts and grants, Department of Veterans Affairs grants, the Microbiology Laboratory Clinical Services, Translational Science Hub, and Personalized Virology Initiative, and Department of Medicine of Mount Sinai Health System and Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. RESEARCH IN CONTEXTO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSThe outbreak of infections with SARS-CoV-2 began in late 2019. Specimens from nasopharyngeal swabs are being used in PCR-based assays to test for the presence of the virus. Until the first week in April, 2020 there were no licensed tests for the presence of serum antibodies against proteins of the virus. The first approved tests are now becoming available, but none use a format that can be scaled up for mass screening which is now needed for implementing various public health measures. As per a recent Pubmed search, less than 10 studies using serologic assays have been published and none are high through-put. Added value of this studyHigh through-put antibody tests are needed in order to identify seroconversion, to perform serosurveys, identify potential donors for plasma therapy, assess the prevalence of infection in populations, identify healthcare workers who may be immune to SARS-CoV-2, and to study the nature of the immune response to this pathogen. The method described for detecting antibodies in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients can be applied in hospital and reference labs, allowing the assessment of present and past infection in a much higher number of donors per unit of time than assays described heretofore. Implications of all the available evidenceThis study shows that a test in which magnetic beads are coated with soluble forms of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 can be used to test for the presence of antibodies targeting this pathogen. The platform allows for the efficient testing of multiple specimens simultaneously using as little as 5 nanograms of antigen per test. This test affords the possibility of large scale, economical and efficient antibody testing.

Matching journals

The top 12 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
based on 1737 papers
Top 43%
11.6%
2
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
based on 77 papers
Top 1.0%
7.9%
3
Viruses
based on 79 papers
Top 0.3%
5.5%
4
Scientific Reports
based on 701 papers
Top 49%
3.1%
5
Journal of Clinical Virology
based on 54 papers
Top 0.8%
3.1%
6
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
based on 137 papers
Top 2%
3.1%
7
Journal of Virological Methods
based on 20 papers
Top 0.6%
3.1%
8
Journal of Medical Virology
based on 95 papers
Top 2%
3.1%
9
Clinical Infectious Diseases
based on 219 papers
Top 9%
2.9%
10
BMJ Open
based on 553 papers
Top 30%
2.9%
11
eBioMedicine
based on 82 papers
Top 1%
2.4%
12
Microbiology Spectrum
based on 86 papers
Top 0.9%
2.4%
50% of probability mass above
13
Frontiers in Medicine
based on 99 papers
Top 11%
1.6%
14
Frontiers in Immunology
based on 140 papers
Top 4%
1.6%
15
Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
based on 15 papers
Top 0.1%
1.6%
16
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
based on 124 papers
Top 6%
1.6%
17
Emerging Infectious Diseases
based on 84 papers
Top 8%
1.4%
18
Journal of Clinical Virology Plus
based on 10 papers
Top 0.1%
1.4%
19
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
based on 115 papers
Top 12%
1.4%
20
The Lancet Microbe
based on 33 papers
Top 2%
1.4%
21
EBioMedicine
based on 21 papers
Top 0.9%
1.2%
22
Biosensors and Bioelectronics
based on 13 papers
Top 0.6%
1.2%
23
Microorganisms
based on 21 papers
Top 0.6%
0.9%
24
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
based on 54 papers
Top 4%
0.9%
25
mSphere
based on 27 papers
Top 2%
0.8%
26
PLOS Pathogens
based on 35 papers
Top 2%
0.8%
27
Clinical Chemistry
based on 14 papers
Top 1%
0.8%
28
iScience
based on 74 papers
Top 6%
0.8%
29
Infectious Diseases and Therapy
based on 18 papers
Top 1%
0.8%
30
Journal of Infection
based on 64 papers
Top 8%
0.7%