ArticleFrontiers in immunology2020
Evaluation of Two Chemiluminescent and Three ELISA Immunoassays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 IgG Antibodies: Implications for Disease Diagnosis and Patients' Management.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring Humoral Immune Responses to SARS-CoV-2: A Comprehensive Review of Serological Assays.Vaccines · 2026Review
- COVID-19 vaccination in relation to immune response and physical activity levels.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Molecular Analysis of Hot-Spot Regions of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in SARS-CoV-2 "Invulnerable" Individuals.Cureus · 2023Article
- A high-throughput fully automatic biosensing platform for efficient COVID-19 detection.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2023Article
- Article
- The rs1883832 Polymorphism (CD40-1C>T) Affects the Intensity of IgA Responses after BNT162b2 VaccinationInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Article
- A method comparison of three immunoassays for detection of neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain in individuals with adenovirus type-5-vectored COVID-19 vaccination.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2022Article
- Article
- Label-Free Physical Techniques and Methodologies for Proteins Detection in Microfluidic Biosensor Structures.Biomedicines · 2022Review
- Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats-Associated Proteins13a combined with magnetic beads, chemiluminescence and reverse transcription-recombinase aided amplification for detection of avian influenza a (H7N9) virus.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Serological and viral genetic features of patients with COVID-19 in a selected German patient cohort-correlation with disease characteristics.GeroScience · 2021Article
- Agreement between commercially available ELISA and in-house Luminex SARS-CoV-2 antibody immunoassays.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The estimation of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies is possibly the best approach to accurately establish the number of infected individuals and the seroprevalence of COVID-19 within a population. Thus, several commercial immunoassays have recently been developed. The purpose of our study was to assess the performance of five commonly used immunoassays in Greece (3 ELISA, namely Euroimmun SARS-CoV-2, GA GENERIC SARS-CoV-2 and Vircell COVID-19; and 2 chemiluminescent, namely ABBOTT SARS-CoV-2 and ROCHE Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 test) for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. Sera specimens derived from 168 individuals were utilized to assess the specificity and sensitivity score of each assay. Among them, we included 99 COVID-19 patients (29 asymptomatic, 36 with symptom onset 4 to 14 days before serum sampling, and 34 with symptom initiation ≥ 15 days ago), and 69 volunteers with sera specimens collected prior to the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak and maintained at -80°C. We demonstrated that chemiluminescent immunoassays exhibit a significantly higher specificity score but a lower sensitivity, compared to ELISA immunoassays. Moreover, immunoassays detecting IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 N protein instead of S protein alone are more reliable, considering both specificity and sensitivity scores. Interestingly, all asymptomatic patients displayed anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies, confirmed by at least two immunoassays. We suggest that chemiluminescent assays could be used as screening methods for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies to evaluate the possible prevalence of disease in the general population, while ELISA assays would be more reliable to evaluate, and follow-up confirmed COVID-19 patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.