Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Comparison of the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Surrogate Neutralization Assays by TECOmedical and DiaPROPH-Med with Samples from Vaccinated and Infected Individuals.
Münsterkötter, Lennart; Hollstein, Moritz Maximilian; Hahn, Andreas; Kröger, Andrea; Schnelle, Moritz; Erpenbeck, Luise; Groß, Uwe; Frickmann, Hagen; Zautner, Andreas Erich.
  • Münsterkötter L; Institute for Medical Microbiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany.
  • Hollstein MM; Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Medical Centre Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany.
  • Hahn A; Institute for Medical Microbiology, Virology and Hygiene, University Medicine Rostock, 18057 Rostock, Germany.
  • Kröger A; Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hospital Hygiene, Medical Faculty, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany.
  • Schnelle M; Research Group Innate Immunity and Infection, Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research, 38124 Braunschweig, Germany.
  • Erpenbeck L; Institute for Clinical Chemistry, University Medical Center Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany.
  • Groß U; Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Medical Centre Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany.
  • Frickmann H; Department of Dermatology, University of Münster, 48149 Münster, Germany.
  • Zautner AE; Institute for Medical Microbiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany.
Viruses ; 14(2)2022 02 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1674819
ABSTRACT
Anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific serological responses are a topic of ongoing evaluation studies. In the study presented here, the anti-SARS-CoV-2 surrogate neutralization assays by TECOmedical and DiaPROPH -Med were assessed in a head-to-head comparison with serum samples of individuals after vaccination as well as after previous infection with SARS-CoV-2. In case of discordant results, a cell culture-based neutralization assay was applied as a reference standard. The TECOmedical assay showed sensitivity and specificity of 100% and 61.3%, respectively, the DiaPROPH-Med assay 95.0% and 48.4%, respectively. As a side finding of the study, differences in the likelihood of expressing neutralizing antibodies could be shown for different exposition types. So, 60 of 81 (74.07%) of the samples with only one vaccination showed an expression of neutralizing antibodies in contrast to 85.71% (60 of 70 samples) of the samples with two vaccinations and 100% (40 of 40) of the samples from previously infected individuals. In conclusion, the both assays showed results similar to previous assessments. While the measured diagnostic accuracy of both assays requires further technical improvement of this diagnostic approach, as the calculated specificity values of 61.3% and 48.4%, respectively, appear acceptable for diagnostic use only in populations with a high percentage of positive subjects, but not at expectedly low positivity rates.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Neutralization Tests / Vaccination / SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19 / Antibodies, Viral Type of study: Cohort study / Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study Topics: Vaccines Limits: Humans Language: English Year: 2022 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: V14020315

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Neutralization Tests / Vaccination / SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19 / Antibodies, Viral Type of study: Cohort study / Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study Topics: Vaccines Limits: Humans Language: English Year: 2022 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: V14020315