ABSTRACT
The virus neutralization test (VNT) is the reference for the assessment of the functional ability of neutralizing antibodies (NAb) to block SARS-CoV-2 entry into cells. New competitive immunoassays measuring antibodies preventing interaction between the spike protein and its cellular receptor are proposed as surrogate VNT (sVNT). We tested three commercial sVNT (a qualitative immunochromatographic test and two quantitative immunoassays named YHLO and TECO) together with a conventional anti-spike IgG assay (bioMerieux) in comparison with an in-house plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50) using the original 19A strain and different variants of concern (VOC), on a panel of 306 sera from naturally-infected or vaccinated patients. The qualitative test was rapidly discarded because of poor sensitivity and specificity. Areas under the curve of YHLO and TECO assays were, respectively, 85.83 and 84.07 (p-value >0.05) using a positivity threshold of 20 for PRNT50, and 95.63 and 90.35 (p-value =0.02) using a threshold of 80. However, the performances of YHLO and bioMerieux were very close for both thresholds, demonstrating the absence of added value of sVNT compared to a conventional assay for the evaluation of the presence of NAb in seropositive subjects. In addition, the PRNT50 assay showed a reduction of NAb titers towards different VOC in comparison to the 19A strain that could not be appreciated by the commercial tests. Despite the good correlation between the anti-spike antibody titer and the titer of NAb by PRNT50, our results highlight the difficulty to distinguish true NAb among the anti-RBD antibodies with commercial user-friendly immunoassays.
ABSTRACT
We conducted a prospective study in healthcare workers (n=296) of the University Hospital of Lyon, France. Serum samples (n=296) collected six months after disease onset were tested using three commercial assays: the Wantai Ab assay detecting total antibodies against the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the S protein, the bioMerieux Vidas assay detecting IgG to the RBD and the Abbott Architect assay detecting IgG to the N protein. The neutralising antibody (NAb) titre was also determined for all samples with a virus neutralisation assay (VNA) using live virus. The positivity rate was 100% with the Wantai assay, 84.8% with the bioMerieux assay and 55.4% with the Abbott assay. Only 51% of HCWs were positive for the presence of NAb. Less than 10 % of HCWs had a NAb titre greater than 80. At a neutralising titre of 80, the area under the curves [IC 95%] was 0.71 [0.62-0.81], 0.75 [0.65-0.85] and 0.95 [0.92-0.97] for Wantai, Abbott and Vidas respectively. The data presented herein suggest that commercial assays detecting antibodies against the N protein must not be used in long-term seroprevalence surveys while the Wantai assay could be useful for this purpose. VNA should remain the gold standard to assess the protective antibody response, but some commercial assays could be used as first-line screening of long-term presence of NAb.
