ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2021
Comparing Immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Detection in Patients with and without Laboratory-Confirmed SARS-CoV-2 Infection.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity of Vaccine Boosters after Ad26.COV2.S Priming.The New England journal of medicine · 2022Trial
- Article
- SARS-CoV-2 in an immunocompromised host: convalescent plasma therapy and viral evolution elucidated by whole genome sequencing.BMJ case reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Severe Neuro-COVID is associated with peripheral immune signatures, autoimmunity and neurodegeneration: a prospective cross-sectional study.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Characterization of pathogen-inactivated COVID-19 convalescent plasma and responses in transfused patients.Transfusion · 2022Article
- Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in people living with HIV in the Netherlands: A nationwide prospective cohort study.PLoS medicine · 2022Article
- Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron on Rapid Antigen Testing Developed for Early-Pandemic SARS-CoV-2 Variants.Microbiology spectrum · 2022Article
- Review
- Antibody response to mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in 182 patients after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation.Transplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation Society · 2022Article
- Risk factors, immune response and whole-genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 in a cruise ship outbreak in Norway.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2022Article
- Identifying COVID-19 Infections From a Vaccinated Population Using Specific IgA Antibody Test.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Natural Bioactive Molecules: An Alternative Approach to the Treatment and Control of COVID-19.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Commercially available SARS-CoV-2-directed antibody assays may assist in diagnosing past exposure to SARS-CoV-2 antigens. We cross-compared the following eight immunoassays detecting antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) or spike (S) antigens in three cohorts consisting of 859 samples from 622 patients: (#1) EDI novel coronavirus COVID-19 (Epitope), (#2) RecomWell SARS-CoV-2 (Mikrogen), (#3) COVID-19 ELISA (VirCell), (#4) Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 N (Roche), (#5) Liaison SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 (DiaSorin), (#6) anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA (EuroImmun), (#7) Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (Roche), and (#8) Liaison SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS (DiaSorin). In cross-sectional cohort 1 (68 sera from 38 patients with documented SARS-CoV-2 infection), agreement between assays #1 to #6 ranged from 75% to 93%, whereby discordance mostly resulted from N-based assays #1 to #4. In cross-sectional cohort 2 (510 sera from 510 patients; 56 documented, 454 unknown SARS-CoV-2 infection), assays #4 to #6 were analyzed further together with assays #7 and #8, revealing 94% concordance (44 [9%] positives and 485 [85%] negatives). Discordance was highest within 2 weeks after SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 diagnosis and confirmed in the longitudinal cohort 3 (281 sera from 74 COVID-19 patients), using assays #4, #6, #7, and #8. Subanalysis of 20 (27%) initially seronegative cohort 3 patients revealed assay-dependent 50% and 90% seroconversion rates after 8 to 11 days and 14 to 18 days, respectively. Increasing SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were significantly associated with declining levels of viral loads, lactate dehydrogenase, interleukin-6, and C-reactive protein and preceded clearance of SARS-CoV-2 detection in the upper respiratory tract by approximately 1 week. SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody assays show substantial agreement, but interpretation of qualitative and semiquantitative results depends on the time elapsed postdiagnosis and the choice of viral antigen. Mounting of systemic SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies may predict recovery from viral injury and clearance of mucosal replication.
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.