Back

Analytical and clinical evaluation of antibody tests for SARS-CoV-2 serosurveillance studies used in Finland in 2020

Ekström, N.; Virta, C.; Haveri, A.; Dub, T.; Hagberg, L.; Solastie, A.; Österlund, P.; Vihervaara, T.; Erlund, I.; Nohynek, H.; Melin, M.

2021-01-25 infectious diseases
10.1101/2021.01.21.21250207 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundSensitive and highly specific antibody tests are critical for detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies especially in populations where seroprevalence is low. AimTo set up, optimize and evaluate the analytical and clinical performance of a new in-house microsphere immunoassay for measurement of IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein for assessment of population seroprevalence in Finland. MethodsWe set up a new in-house microsphere immunoassay (FMIA) with SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein and optimized its analytical performance. For evaluation of clinical performance, we tested sera collected in a well-characterized cohort of PCR positive-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 patients (n=89) with mostly mild symptoms, and before the COVID-19 pandemic (n=402), for nucleoprotein specific IgG concentrations by FMIA and a commercial chemiluminescent immunoassay and for neutralizing antibodies by the microneutralization test. ResultsThe analytical performance of FMIA was established in terms of sensitivity, linearity and precision. FMIA discriminated between COVID-19 patient and control samples with high specificity (100%) and sensitivity (100%). We generated FMIA seropositivity cut-offs, 0.46 and 1.71 U/ml, for low- and high-seroprevalence settings, respectively. In addition, we obtained high level of agreement between FMIA results and results by the microneutralization test. ConclusionThe fluorescent microsphere immunoassay showed excellent analytical and clinical performance and is well suited for serosurveillance studies of SARS-CoV-2. However, to optimize analytical sensitivity and clinical specificity of the assay, different seropositivity thresholds depending on the intended use of the assay and the target population, may be needed.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.