ArticleScientific reports2022
The influence of time on the sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 serological testing.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04380896 (COVID-19 Staff Testing of Antibody Responses Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 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.
COVID-19 Staff Testing of Antibody Responses Study (CO-STARS)
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sotrovimab versus usual care in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2026Trial
- Estimating Population Immunity and Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination in Washington State and Oregon.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Levels in a Cohort of Health Care Workers Before and After the Omicron Wave in Canada.Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada · 2025Article
- COVID-19, tuberculosis, and HIV triad: a prospective observational study in ambulatory patients in Kenya, Uganda, and South Africa.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Socioeconomic and Demographic Risk Factors for SARS-CoV-2 Seropositivity Among Healthcare Workers in a UK Hospital: A Prospective Cohort Study.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2024Observational
- Characterization of antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 Orf8 from three waves of COVID-19 outbreak in Thailand.PloS one · 2024Article
- The seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies in Australian children: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2024Article
- Presence of neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in asymptomatic population of N'Djamena, Chad.Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2024Article
- Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and associated risk factors during the second wave of infection in a university community in Cameroon.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2023Article
- Quantification of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Binding Antibody Levels To Assess Infection and Vaccine-Induced Immunity Using WHO Standards.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
15 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Sensitive serological testing is essential to estimate the proportion of the population exposed or infected with SARS-CoV-2, to guide booster vaccination and to select patients for treatment with anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The performance of serological tests is usually evaluated at 14-21 days post infection. This approach fails to take account of the important effect of time on test performance after infection or exposure has occurred. We performed parallel serological testing using 4 widely used assays (a multiplexed SARS-CoV-2 Nucleoprotein (N), Spike (S) and Receptor Binding Domain assay from Meso Scale Discovery (MSD), the Roche Elecsys-Nucleoprotein (Roche-N) and Spike (Roche-S) assays and the Abbott Nucleoprotein assay (Abbott-N) on serial positive monthly samples collected as part of the Co-STARs study ( www.clinicaltrials.gov , NCT04380896) up to 200 days following infection. Our findings demonstrate the considerable effect of time since symptom onset on the diagnostic sensitivity of different assays. Using a time-to-event analysis, we demonstrated that 50% of the Abbott nucleoprotein assays will give a negative result after 175 days (median survival time 95% CI 168-185 days), compared to the better performance over time of the Roche Elecsys nucleoprotein assay (93% survival probability at 200 days, 95% CI 88-97%). Assays targeting the spike protein showed a lower decline over the follow-up period, both for the MSD spike assay (97% survival probability at 200 days, 95% CI 95-99%) and the Roche Elecsys spike assay (95% survival probability at 200 days, 95% CI 93-97%). The best performing quantitative Roche Elecsys Spike assay showed no evidence of waning Spike antibody titers over the 200-day time course of the study. We have shown that compared to other assays evaluated, the Abbott-N assay fails to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies as time passes since infection. In contrast the Roche Elecsys Spike Assay and the MSD assay maintained a high sensitivity for the 200-day duration of the study. These limitations of the Abbott assay should be considered when quantifying the immune correlates of protection or the need for SARS-CoV-2 antibody therapy. The high levels of maintained detectable neutralizing spike antibody titers identified by the quantitative Roche Elecsys assay is encouraging and provides further evidence in support of long-lasting SARS-CoV-2 protection following natural infection.
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.