Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35901110›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Optimization and evaluation of a live virus SARS-CoV-2 neutralization assay.

Anders Frische, Patrick Terrence Brooks, Mikkel Gybel-Brask, Susanne Gjørup Sækmose, Bitten Aagaard Jensen, Susan Mikkelsen, Mie Topholm Bruun, Lasse Boding, Charlotta Polacek Strandh, Charlotte Sværke Jørgensen and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. 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

13 authors.

Anders FrischeDepartment of Virus & Microbiological Special Diagnostics, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-2841-7655
Patrick Terrence BrooksDepartment of Clinical Immunology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mikkel Gybel-BraskDepartment of Clinical Immunology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-5716-5899
Susanne Gjørup SækmoseDepartment of Clinical Immunology, Zealand University Hospital, Naestved, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-1346-0052
Bitten Aagaard JensenDepartment of Clinical Immunology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Susan MikkelsenDepartment of Clinical Immunology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Mie Topholm BruunDepartment of Clinical Immunology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Lasse BodingDanish National Biobank, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Charlotta Polacek StrandhDepartment of Virus & Microbiological Special Diagnostics, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Charlotte Sværke JørgensenDepartment of Virus & Microbiological Special Diagnostics, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Karen Angeliki KrogfeltDepartment of Virus & Microbiological Special Diagnostics, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anders FomsgaardDepartment of Virus & Microbiological Special Diagnostics, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ria LassauniereDepartment of Virus & Microbiological Special Diagnostics, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-3910-7185

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Virus neutralization assays provide a means to quantitate functional antibody responses that block virus infection. These assays are instrumental in defining vaccine and therapeutic antibody potency, immune evasion by viral variants, and post-infection immunity. Here we describe the development, optimization and evaluation of a live virus microneutralization assay specific for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this assay, SARS-CoV-2 clinical isolates are pre-incubated with serial diluted antibody and added to Vero E6 cells. Replicating virus is quantitated by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) targeting the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein and the standardized 50% virus inhibition titer calculated. We evaluated critical test parameters that include virus titration, assay linearity, number of cells, viral dose, incubation period post-inoculation, and normalization methods. Virus titration at 96 hours was determined optimal to account for different growth kinetics of clinical isolates. Nucleocapsid protein levels directly correlated with virus inoculum, with the strongest correlation at 24 hours post-inoculation. Variance was minimized by infecting a cell monolayer, rather than a cell suspension. Neutralization titers modestly decreased with increasing numbers of Vero E6 cells and virus amount. Application of two different normalization models effectively reduced the intermediate precision coefficient of variance to <16.5%. The SARS-CoV-2 microneutralization assay described and evaluated here is based on the influenza virus microneutralization assay described by WHO, and are proposed as a standard assay for comparing neutralization investigations.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2Antibodies, NeutralizingAntibodies, ViralEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayHumansNeutralization TestsNucleocapsid ProteinsSpike Glycoprotein, CoronavirusAntibodies, NeutralizingAntibodies, ViralNucleocapsid ProteinsSpike Glycoprotein, Coronavirusspike protein, SARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID35901110
PMCPMC9333216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.