Comparative performance of CDC-modified SARS-CoV-2 real-time PCR assay with four different commercial assays: laboratory-based study.

The coronavirus infectious disease (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viruses. The pandemic has emerged as a global public health crisis, and the threat of fast-spreading of the latest variants of the coronavirus (such as omicron, delta) is rampant. Therefore, a fast and reliable diagnostic assay is needed to make the clinical decision for further treatment. The study aims to develop a Centers for Disease and Prevention (CDC)-modified qualitative real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-qPCR) assay and parallel assessment of commercially available RT-qPCR assay (Altona, Seegene, BD, and GBC) to detect SARS-CoV-2. Two hundred nine samples were chosen randomly out of around two hundred thousand samples. The panel consisted of SARS-CoV-2-positive (n = 156) and SARS-CoV-2-negative (n = 52) nasopharyngeal swab specimens for a primary clinical evaluation. Furthermore, 29 positive samples were sequenced using Oxford Nanopore Minion technology. Two hundred nine patient sample data of the cycle threshold (Ct) readings for target genes of five assays are 100% sensitive for Ct values. Mean Ct values for N1, N2, RdRp, S, and E of the positive controls in CDC assay, RealStar®, Allplex, GBC, and SD Biosensor were 17.5 ± 0.49, 16.9 ± 0.51, 20 ± 0.49, 21.7 ± 0.38, and 23.1 ± 0.43, respectively. F test value shows ≥ 1, which was statistically significant. All assays showed an efficiency of < 120% and R squares were < 0.99, which is well above the required threshold value. Thus, when taking the CDC-modified assay as a gold standard, the other four assays demonstrated a p value of 0.0000, concordance at 100%, and a Kappa at 1.000. A maximum-likelihood (ML) tree was constructed and compared based on full-length SARS-CoV-2 with Wuhan isolate. These isolates are closely related to the B.1.617 lineage and reference sequences. Therefore, we conclude that all RT-PCR kits assessed in this study shall be used for routine diagnostics of COVID-19 in patients. Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00580-022-03356-y.

Evaluation of Commercial Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Assays and Comparison of Standardized Titers in Vaccinated Health Care Workers.

With the availability of vaccines, commercial assays detecting anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 antibodies (Ab) evolved toward quantitative assays directed to the spike glycoprotein or its receptor binding domain (RBD). The main objective of the present study was to compare the Ab titers obtained with quantitative commercial binding Ab assays, after one dose (convalescent individuals) or two doses (naive individuals) of vaccine, in health care workers (HCW). Antibody titers were measured in 255 sera (from 150 HCW) with five quantitative immunoassays (Abbott RBD IgG II quant, bioMérieux RBD IgG, DiaSorin Trimeric spike IgG, Siemens Healthineers RBD IgG, Wantai RBD IgG). One qualitative total antibody anti-RBD detection assay (Wantai) was used to detect previous infection before vaccination. The results are presented in binding Ab units (BAU)/mL after application, when possible, of a conversion factor provided by the manufacturers and established from a World Health Organization internal standard. There was a 100% seroconversion with all assays evaluated after two doses of vaccine. With assays allowing BAU/mL correction, Ab titers were correlated (Pearson correlation coefficient, ρ, range: 0.85-0.94). The titer differences varied by a mean of 10.6% between Siemens and bioMérieux assays to 60.9% between Abbott and DiaSorin assays. These results underline the importance of BAU conversion for the comparison of Ab titer obtained with the different quantitative assays. However, significant differences persist, notably, between kits detecting Ab against the different antigens. A true standardization of the assays would be to include the International Standard in the calibration of each assay to express the results in IU/mL.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies formed in response to the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1237 mRNA vaccine by commercial antibody tests.

BACKGROUND: With rapid approval of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, the ability of clinical laboratories to detect vaccine-induced antibodies with available high-throughput commercial assays is unknown. We aimed to determine if commercial serology assays can detect vaccine-induced antibodies (VIAs) and understand the vaccination response. METHODS: This cohort study recruited healthcare workers and residents of long-term care facilities (receiving the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 products, respectively) who underwent serum collection pre-vaccination (BNT162b2 group), 2-weeks post vaccination (both groups), and pre-2nd dose (both groups). Sera were tested for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG using four commercial assays (Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant, DiaSorin Trimeric S IgG, and GenScript cPASS) to detect VIAs. Secondary outcomes included description of post-vaccination antibody response and correlation with neutralizing titers. RESULTS: 225 participants (177 receiving BNT162b2 and 48 receiving mRNA-1273) were included (median age 41 years; 66-78% female). Nucleocapsid IgG was found in 4.1% and 21.9% of the BNT162b2 (baseline) and mRNA-1273 (2-weeks post first dose). All anti-spike assays detected antibodies post-vaccination, with an average increase of 87.2% (range 73.8-94.3%; BNT162b2), and 25.2% (range 23.8-26.7%; mRNA-1273) between the first and last sampling time points (all p < 0.05). Neutralizing antibodies were detected at all post-vaccine timepoints for both vaccine arms, with increasing titers over time (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Anti-spike vaccine-induced SARS-CoV-2 IgG are detectable by commercially available high-throughput assays and increases over time. Prior to second dose of vaccination, neutralizing antibodies are detectable in 73-89% of individuals, suggesting most individuals would have some degree of protection from subsequent infection.

SARS-CoV-2 Serology Status Detected by Commercialized Platforms Distinguishes Previous Infection and Vaccination Adaptive Immune Responses.

BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has infected over 110 million individuals and led to 2.5 million deaths worldwide. As more individuals are vaccinated, the clinical performance and utility of SARS-CoV-2 serology platforms needs to be evaluated. METHODS: The ability of 4 commercial SARS-CoV-2 serology platforms to detect previous infection or vaccination were evaluated using a cohort of 53 patients who were SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive, 89 SARS-CoV-2-vaccinated healthcare workers (Pfizer or Moderna), and 127 patients who were SARS-CoV-2 negative. Serology results were compared to a cell-based SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus (PSV) neutralizing antibodies assay. RESULTS: The Roche S-(spike) antibody and Diazyme neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) assays detected adaptive immune response in 100.0% and 90.1% of vaccinated individuals who received 2 doses of vaccine (initial and booster), respectively. The Roche N-(nucleocapsid) antibody assay and Diazyme IgG assay did not detect adaptive immune response in vaccinated individuals. The Diazyme NAbs assay correlated with the PSV SARS-CoV-2 median infective dose (ID50) neutralization titers (R2 = 0.70), while correlation of the Roche S-antibody assay was weaker (R2 = 0.39). Median PSV SARS-CoV-2 ID50 titers more than doubled in vaccinated individuals who received 2 doses of the Moderna vaccine (ID50, 597) compared to individuals who received a single dose (ID50, 284). CONCLUSIONS: The Roche S-antibody and Diazyme NAbs assays robustly detected adaptive immune responses in SARS-CoV-2 vaccinated individuals and SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals. The Diazyme NAbs assay strongly correlates with the PSV SARS-CoV-2 NAbs in vaccinated individuals. Understanding the reactivity of commercially available serology platforms is important when distinguishing vaccination response versus natural infection.