Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32707511›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology2020

SARS-CoV-2-IgG response is different in COVID-19 outpatients and asymptomatic contact persons.

Nele Wellinghausen, Dietmar Plonné, Meike Voss, Ralitsa Ivanova, Reinhard Frodl, Susanne Deininger

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nele WellinghausenMVZ Labor Ravensburg, Elisabethenstr. 11, Ravensburg, 88212 Germany. Electronic address: nele.wellinghausen@labor-gaertner.de.
Dietmar PlonnéMVZ Humangenetik Ulm, Karlstr. 31, Ulm, 89073 Germany.
Meike VossMVZ Labor Ravensburg, Elisabethenstr. 11, Ravensburg, 88212 Germany.
Ralitsa IvanovaMVZ Labor Ravensburg, Elisabethenstr. 11, Ravensburg, 88212 Germany.
Reinhard FrodlMVZ Labor Ravensburg, Elisabethenstr. 11, Ravensburg, 88212 Germany.
Susanne DeiningerMVZ Labor Ravensburg, Elisabethenstr. 11, Ravensburg, 88212 Germany.
MVZ Labor Ravensburg · DEPraxis für Humangenetik · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Commercially available immunoassays have been developed for sensitive and specific detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. While a fast and reliable IgG response has been reported for samples from hospitalized COVID-19 patients, less is known about ambulatory patients. We evaluated the SARS-CoV-2-IgG response by the Anti-SARS-CoV-2-ELISA IgG (Euroimmun) in a defined cohort of SARS-CoV-2-PCR-confirmed outpatients and asymptomatic contact persons including 137 serum samples from PCR-confirmed outpatients (n = 111) and asymptomatic but PCR-positive contact persons (n = 26) sent to our laboratory as part of routine diagnostics for determination of SARS-CoV-2-IgG. Overall positivity rate for SARS-CoV-2-IgG was 81.1 % in outpatients (irrespective of sampling before or after day 21 after onset of symptoms) but significantly lower in asymptomatic contact persons (15.4 %, p < 0.0001). In contact persons without symptoms the ct values of the PCR assays were significantly higher (5-7 threshold cycles) than in outpatients, and ct values were significantly negative correlated to the SARS-CoV-2-IgG ratio, suggesting a lower viral load as a possible explanation for lower rate of seropositivity. In summary, our study shows that serological response to SARS-CoV-2 in outpatients including asymptomatic persons is less pronounced than in hospitalized patients. Further controlled studies are urgently needed to determine serological response in outpatients and asymptomatic persons since this is the main target population for seroepidemiological investigations.

Indexed as

Antibodies, ViralBetacoronavirusCarrier StateCohort StudiesCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19GermanyHumansImmunoassayImmunoglobulin GOutpatientsPandemicsPneumonia, ViralSARS-CoV-2Sensitivity and SpecificityViral LoadAntibodies, ViralImmunoglobulin GContact personsCOVID-19ct valuesOutpatientsSARS-CoV-2-IgG

Identifiers

PMID32707511
PMCPMC7336915
OpenAlexW3039877622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.