Back

Performance of Abbott Architect, Ortho Vitros, and Euroimmun Assays in Detecting Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Mahajan, S.; Redlich, C. A.; Wisnewski, A. V.; Fazen, L. E.; Rao, L. V.; Kuppusamy, K.; Ko, A. I.; Krumholz, H. M.

2020-07-30 infectious diseases
10.1101/2020.07.29.20164343 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundSeveral serological assays have been developed to detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies, but evidence about their comparative performance is limited. We sought to assess the sensitivity of four anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) in individuals with evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. MethodsWe obtained sera from 36 individuals with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March and May 2020. We evaluated samples collected at around 21 days ({+/-}14 days) after their initial PCR test using 3 commercially available ELISA assays, two anti-spike (Ortho- Clinical Diagnostics Vitros, and Euroimmun) and one anti-nucleocapsid (Abbott Architect), and a Yale-developed anti-spike ELISA test. We determined the sensitivity of the tests and compared their results. The Euroimmun and Yale ELISA had an equivocal and indeterminate category, which were considered as both negative and positive. ResultsAmong the 36 individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection, mean age was 43 ({+/-}13) years and 19 (53%) were female. The sensitivities of the tests were not significantly different (Abbott Architect, Ortho Vitros, Euroimmmun, and Yale assays: 86% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71- 95), 94% (95% CI, 81-99), 86% (95% CI, 71-95), and 94% (95% CI, 81-99), respectively; p- value=0.464). The sensitivities of the Euroimmun and Yale ELISA tests increased when the equivocal/indeterminate results were considered positive (97% [95% CI, 85-100] and 100% [95% CI, 90-100], respectively), but were not significantly different from other tests (p=0.082). The cross-correlation coefficient ranged from 0.85-0.98 between three anti-spike protein assays (Ortho Vitros, Euroimmun, Yale) and was 0.58-0.71 between the three anti-spike protein assays and the anti-nucleocapsid assay (Abbott). ConclusionThe sensitivities of four anti-SARS-CoV-2 protein assays did not significantly differ, although the sample size was small. Sensitivity also depended on the interpretation of equivocal and indeterminate results. The strongest correlations were present for the three anti- spike proteins assays. These findings suggest that individual test characteristics and the correlation between different tests should be considered when comparing or aggregating data across different populations studies for serologic surveillance of past SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Clinical Virology
62 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.7%
2
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
10.5%
3
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.5%
4
Journal of Virological Methods
36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.9%
5
Journal of Medical Virology
137 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.3%
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 34%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
7
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
8
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
9
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
126 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.6%
10
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
11
Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
12
Emerging Infectious Diseases
103 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
13
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 58%
1.7%
14
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
15
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
134 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
16
Journal of Clinical Virology Plus
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
17
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
18
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
36 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
19
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
60 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
20
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
21
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
22
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.2%
23
Journal of Medical Microbiology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
24
Viruses
318 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
25
Eurosurveillance
80 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
26
Pathogens
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
27
Journal of Immunological Methods
24 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
28
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
29
Annals of Internal Medicine
27 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
30
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%