Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33578017›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases2021

Specificity testing by point prevalence as a simple assessment strategy using the Roche Elecsys® anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay.

Maximilian Kittel, Peter Findeisen, Maria-Christina Muth, Margot Thiaucourt, Catharina Gerhards, Michael Neumaier, Verena Haselmann

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Maximilian KittelDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim of the University of Heidelberg, 68167, Mannheim, Germany. Electronic address: maximilian.kittel@umm.de.
Peter FindeisenMVZ Laboratory Dr. Limbach & Colleagues, Im Breitspiel 16, 69126, Heidelberg, Germany.
Maria-Christina MuthMVZ Laboratory Dr. Limbach & Colleagues, Im Breitspiel 16, 69126, Heidelberg, Germany.
Margot ThiaucourtDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim of the University of Heidelberg, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
Catharina GerhardsDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim of the University of Heidelberg, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
Michael NeumaierDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim of the University of Heidelberg, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
Verena HaselmannDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim of the University of Heidelberg, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
University Medical Centre Mannheim · DEHeidelberg University · DEUniversity Hospital Heidelberg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe detection of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is mandatory for the diagnosis, retrospective assessment of disease progression, and correct evaluation of the current infection situation in the population. Many such assays have been launched by various manufacturers. Unfortunately, the new US Food and Drug Administration emergency use regulations have resulted in a situation where laboratories have to perform their own validation studies but many of these laboratories do not have the biobank needed to conduct the studies.

methodsWe introduce a method that allows institutions to quickly perform a verification study in a low-prevalence infection situation. As proof of concept, we used the Roche Elecsys® anti-SARS-CoV-2 electrochemiluminescence immunoassay and an SAP-based hospital information system. The Shenzhen YHLO Biotech IgM and IgG assay targeting other surface patterns was used as a confirmatory test.

resultsThe Roche assay demonstrated a limit of detection of 0.069 cutoff index and successfully passed the performance validation according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute EP15-A3. The study population of 627 inpatients has a median age of 64 years, and approximately 13% of the group were under intensive care at the respective time point. All patients included tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (cobas® 6800, Roche, Mannheim, Germany). Only one false-positive result was obtained, resulting in a specificity for the Roche Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 test of 99.84% and a negative predictive value of 99.98%.

conclusionsThe anonymized use of residual material enables quick evaluation of anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays, as shown in this work with the Roche Elecsys assay. Comparison of the control population with economic data makes it possible to validate the sampling set and therefore to determine diagnostic specificity. By use of the approach chosen, it was shown that the Roche test achieved very good results in terms of diagnostic specificity, reproducibility, and limit of detection.

Indexed as

Validation Studies as TopicAgedAntibodies, ViralCOVID-19COVID-19 Serological TestingFemaleGermanyHumansImmunoassayLaboratoriesMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsPrevalenceReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesAntibodies, ViralAnti-SARS-CoV-2COVID-19RocheSerological assayValidationVerification

Identifiers

PMID33578017
PMCPMC7872847
OpenAlexW3126285019

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.