ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate longitudinally the persistence of humoral immunity for up to 6 months in a cohort of hospital employees with mild coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We measured anti-RBD (receptor binding domain of viral spike protein), anti-N (viral nucleoprotein) and neutralizing antibodies at 1, 3 and 6 months after mostly mild COVID-19 in 200 hospital workers using commercial ELISAs and a surrogate virus neutralization assay. RESULTS: Antibodies specific for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) persisted in all participants for up to 6 months. Anti-RBD geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) progressively increased between months 1 (74.2 U/mL, 95%CI: 62.7-87.8), 3 (103.2 U/mL, 95%CI: 87.9-121.2;p < 0.001), and 6 (123.3 U/mL, 95%CI: 103.4-147.0;p < 0.001) in the whole cohort. Anti-N antibodies were detectable in >97% at all times. Neutralizing antibodies were detectable in 99.5% of participants (195/196) at 6 months post infection. Their GMC progressively decreased between months 1 (20.1 AU/mL, 95%CI: 16.9-24.0), 3 (15.2 AU/mL, 95%CI: 13.2-17.6;p < 0.001) and 6 (9.4 AU/mL, 95%CI: 7.7-11.4;p < 0.001). RBD-ACE2-inhibiting antibody titres and anti-RBD antibody concentrations strongly correlated at each timepoint (all r > 0.86, p < 0.001). Disease severity was associated with higher initial anti-RBD and RBD-ACE2-inhibiting antibody titres, but not with their kinetics. CONCLUSIONS: Neutralizing antibodies persisted at 6 months in almost all participants, indicating more durability than initially feared. Anti-RBD antibodies persisted better and even increased over time, possibly related to the preferential detection of progressively higher-affinity antibodies.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To validate the diagnostic accuracy of a Euroimmun SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA immunoassay for COVID-19. METHODS: In this unmatched (1:2) case-control validation study, we used sera of 181 laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases and 326 controls collected before SARS-CoV-2 emergence. Diagnostic accuracy of the immunoassay was assessed against a whole spike protein-based recombinant immunofluorescence assay (rIFA) by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. Discrepant cases between ELISA and rIFA were further tested by pseudo-neutralization assay. RESULTS: COVID-19 patients were more likely to be male and older than controls, and 50.3% were hospitalized. ROC curve analyses indicated that IgG and IgA had high diagnostic accuracies with AUCs of 0.990 (95% Confidence Interval [95%CI]: 0.983-0.996) and 0.978 (95%CI: 0.967-0.989), respectively. IgG assays outperformed IgA assays (p=0.01). Taking an assessed 15% inter-assay imprecision into account, an optimized IgG ratio cut-off > 2.5 displayed a 100% specificity (95%CI: 99-100) and a 100% positive predictive value (95%CI: 96-100). A 0.8 cut-off displayed a 94% sensitivity (95%CI: 88-97) and a 97% negative predictive value (95%CI: 95-99). Substituting the upper threshold for the manufacturer's, improved assay performance, leaving 8.9% of IgG ratios indeterminate between 0.8-2.5. CONCLUSIONS: The Euroimmun assay displays a nearly optimal diagnostic accuracy using IgG against SARS-CoV-2 in patient samples, with no obvious gains from IgA serology. The optimized cut-offs are fit for rule-in and rule-out purposes, allowing determination of whether individuals in our study population have been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 or not. IgG serology should however not be considered as a surrogate of protection at this stage.