• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

J Clin Virol . Comparison of the measured values of quantitative SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody assays

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
J Clin Virol


. 2022 Aug 19;155:105269.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2022.105269. Online ahead of print.
Comparison of the measured values of quantitative SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody assays


Lars Müller[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Judith Kannenberg[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ronald Biemann[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Mario Hönemann[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Grit Ackermann[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Christian Jassoy[SUP] 4 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Background: The concentration of antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is frequently being measured for clinical and epidemiological purposes. The aim of this study was to examine whether the results of different quantitative SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody assays are comparable.
Material and methods: The Siemens SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant, Roche ElecsysT Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S, and Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2-QuantiVac assay were compared with 110 sera from patients 6-9 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection and the WHO First International SARS-CoV-2 antibody standard 20/136. The antibody values were converted into WHO binding antibody units (BAU)/ml. The diagnostic sensitivity of the assays was determined and the antibody values were compared.
Results: The diagnostic sensitivity ranged from 57.3% (Euroimmun) to 100% (Roche). The antibody concentration values of different assays correlated with Pearson coefficients of correlation between 0.729 and 0.953. The geometric mean antibody values of the Abbott, Siemens and Euroimmun assay varied by a factor of 1.1-1.2. The geometric mean antibody values of the Roche assay were 2.4-2.8 times higher than those from the other assays. The assays yielded varying results with the WHO International antibody standard.
Conclusions: The quantitative SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays from Abbott, Siemens, Roche and Euroimmun correlate strongly but differ in the antibody concentrations. Therefore, the same assay should be used when testing patients repeatedly. In addition, the name of the assay used and the manufacturer should be indicated along with the test results.

Keywords: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 antibody assay; SARS-CoV-2 spike protein; Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2).
 
Back
Top Bottom