ArticleMicrobiology spectrum2025
Inter-laboratory harmonization of microsphere immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection in contrived dried blood spots and oral fluids.
Article in Microbiology spectrum, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dried blood spots (DBS) and oral fluids (OF) are easily attainable biospecimen types that enabled population-scale antibody monitoring for SARS-CoV-2 exposure and vaccination. However, the degree to which the two different biospecimen types can be used interchangeably remains unclear. To address this question, we generated contrived DBS (cDBS) and contrived OF (cOF) from serum panels of SARS-CoV-2-infected, vaccinated, and uninfected individuals. The contrived samples were evaluated using SARS-CoV-2 multiplexed microsphere immunoassays (MIAs) at two different institutions. Intra-laboratory tests revealed near-perfect agreement between cDBS and cOF for N and S antigens, as evidenced by κ = 0.97-1 and 98%-100% agreement. Interlaboratory comparisons were equally robust for both N (κ = 0.94-0.96; 97.5%-98 % agreement) and S (κ = 0.98-1.0; 99.0%-100%). Furthermore, assays were transferred between labs, including methods and reagents, and a subset of cDBS and cOF samples ( IMPORTANCE: The establishment of common research and clinical laboratory methodologies for the assessment of SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels in different biospecimen types is of paramount importance in estimating immunity to COVID-19 infections in communities and populations. In this report, we evaluated multiplex immunoassay protocols to enable comparisons between two readily attainable biospecimen types, namely, dried blood spots (DBS) and oral fluids (OF), which are employed in population-scale antibody monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers and virus-neutralizing potential.
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.