Analytical and clinical evaluation of four anti-SARS-CoV-2 serologic (IgM, IgG, and total) immunoassays
Higgins, V.; Fabros, A.; Wang, X. Y.; Bhandari, M.; Daghfal, D. J.; Kulasingam, V.
Show abstract
IntroductionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is diagnosed by molecular-based detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Serologic testing detects antibodies specific to SARS-CoV-2 and IgM specifically may serve as an adjunct test to PCR early in disease. We evaluated the Abbott anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG assays along with DiaSorin anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and Roche anti-SARS-CoV-2 Total. MethodsSpecimens from 175 PCR-positive patients and 107 control specimens were analyzed using Abbott IgM and IgG, DiaSorin IgG, and Roche Total (IgA, IgG, IgM) assays. Sensitivity, specificity, cross-reactivity, concordance between assays, trends over time, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were determined. ResultsAbbott IgM sensitivity was 63.6% at 0 days post-PCR positivity, 76.5% at 1-5d, 76.3% at 6-14d, 85.2% at 15-30d, and 63.6% at >30d. All assays exhibited highest sensitivity 15-30d post-PCR positivity (83.3-85.2%). Combining Abbott IgM and IgG improved sensitivity by 22.7% compared to IgG alone when tested 0d post-PCR positivity. All assays had a specificity of 100% and only Abbott IgG exhibited cross-reactivity (anti-dsDNA). Cohens kappa varied between 0.86-0.93. Time to seroconversion from PCR positivity was lowest for Abbott IgM and highest for Abbott IgG. NPV was highest for Abbott IgM <14 days post-PCR positivity and Abbott IgG [≥]14 days. ConclusionThe Abbott IgM assay exhibited the earliest response and greatest signal in most patients evaluated for serial sampling and had the highest NPV <14 days post-PCR positivity, suggesting its potential utility as an adjunct test to PCR early in disease course.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Performance of three SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays, three rapid lateral flow tests and a novel bead-based affinity surrogate test for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in human serum 97%
- Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels are concordant across multiple platforms but are not fully predictive of sterilizing immunity 97%
- Performance characteristics of the VIDAS ® SARS-COV-2 IgM and IgG serological assays 96%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparative study of four SARS-CoV-2 Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT) platforms demonstrates that ID NOW performance is impaired substantially by patient and specimen type. 95%
- Retrospective Clinical Evaluation of Four Lateral Flow Assays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies 95%
- Verification of the Abbott Alinity m Resp-4-Plex Assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B, and respiratory syncytial virus 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical evaluation of BD Veritor™ SARS-CoV-2 and Flu A+B Assay for point-of-care (POC) System 96%
- A Reagent and Virus Benchmarking Panel for a Uniform Analytical Performance Assessment of N Antigen–Based Diagnostic Tests for COVID-19 96%
- Comparison of LIAISON QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus with QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Point of Care Devices in the Laboratory and Clinical Setting 97%
- Assessing the performance of a serological point-of-care test in measuring detectable antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 96%
- Diagnostic accuracy of two commercial SARS-CoV-2 Antigen-detecting rapid tests at the point of care in community-based testing centers 96%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.