TY - JOUR
T1 - Borderline and weakly positive antibody levels against the S-protein of SARS-CoV-2 exhibit limited agreement with virus neutralization titres
AU - Egger, Alexander E
AU - Irsara, Christian
AU - Holzer, Barbara
AU - Winkler, Christoph
AU - Bellmann-Weiler, Rosa
AU - Weiss, Günter
AU - Hartmann, Boris
AU - Prokop, Wolfgang
AU - Hoermann, Gregor
AU - Griesmacher, Andrea
AU - Anliker, Markus
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021
PY - 2022/2
Y1 - 2022/2
N2 - The presence of neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in a large number of people is - besides cellular immunity - important to overcome the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. While determination of neutralizing antibodies via virus neutralization tests are laborious, assays to determine the antibody levels serologically are fully automated and widely available. Correlations between these methodologies were recently given by the manufacturers, however performance in samples close to the cut off value have not yet been fully validated. Thus, we analysed 22 borderline and low positive (<100 BAU/ml) samples and 9 high positive (≥ 100 BAU/ml) from infected and/or vaccinated individuals and compared the SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant assay (Abbott), LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG (Diasorin), Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (Roche), and SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Siemens) with results obtained from a virus neutralization test. Based on the cut off values given by Abbott, Diasorin, Roche, and Siemens, the positive serologic results were concordant with the virus neutralization test in 100%, 76%, 88%, and 71%, respectively, while in turn, negative ones were in agreement in 29%, 79%, 93%, and 86%, respectively. In conclusion, weakly positive, serologic results are challenging to correctly predict the presence of neutralizing antibodies. Our study suggests, that different cut off values (for positivity
vs. presence of neutralizing antibodies) could improve the test's performance, but determination thereof requires more samples to be analysed.
AB - The presence of neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in a large number of people is - besides cellular immunity - important to overcome the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. While determination of neutralizing antibodies via virus neutralization tests are laborious, assays to determine the antibody levels serologically are fully automated and widely available. Correlations between these methodologies were recently given by the manufacturers, however performance in samples close to the cut off value have not yet been fully validated. Thus, we analysed 22 borderline and low positive (<100 BAU/ml) samples and 9 high positive (≥ 100 BAU/ml) from infected and/or vaccinated individuals and compared the SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant assay (Abbott), LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG (Diasorin), Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (Roche), and SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Siemens) with results obtained from a virus neutralization test. Based on the cut off values given by Abbott, Diasorin, Roche, and Siemens, the positive serologic results were concordant with the virus neutralization test in 100%, 76%, 88%, and 71%, respectively, while in turn, negative ones were in agreement in 29%, 79%, 93%, and 86%, respectively. In conclusion, weakly positive, serologic results are challenging to correctly predict the presence of neutralizing antibodies. Our study suggests, that different cut off values (for positivity
vs. presence of neutralizing antibodies) could improve the test's performance, but determination thereof requires more samples to be analysed.
KW - Automated antibody assays
KW - Correlation
KW - Neutralizing antibodies
KW - SARS-CoV-2
KW - Serology
KW - Virus neutralization test
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85126939503&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jcvp.2021.100058
DO - 10.1016/j.jcvp.2021.100058
M3 - Article
C2 - 35262031
SN - 2667-0380
VL - 2
SP - 100058
JO - Journal of Clinical Virology Plus
JF - Journal of Clinical Virology Plus
IS - 1
M1 - 100058
ER -