ArticleViruses2025
Assessing the Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Mutations on Antibody Binding: A Comparative Assessment of the Wuhan and JN.1 Variants' Full-Length Spikes in a Multiplex Luminex Assay.
Article in Viruses, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to evolve, with mutations leading to the emergence of new variants. JN.1, a subvariant of omicron BA.2.86, has demonstrated marked immune escape and is now included in updated vaccine formulations. While reduced sensitivity has been reported for antibody assays using ancestral spike protein subunits to detect omicron-induced responses, the performance of full-length spike-based assays against omicron sublineages remains unclear. We aimed to compare the sensitivity of ELISA and Luminex assays using full-length spike proteins from the ancestral Wuhan strain and the JN.1 variant.
methodsWuhan and JN.1 full-length spike protein constructs were designed and expressed in Expi293F mammalian cells. In-house ELISAs based on previously validated protocols were used to measure anti-spike IgG levels. Additionally, a Luminex-based assay for anti-spike antibody detection was developed and validated. Both assays were applied to the following sample groups: pre-pandemic samples (designated "gold standard negatives"); PCR confirmed 2020 positives ("gold standard wildtype positives"); PCR confirmed 2024 positives ("gold standard omicron positives"); 2022 vaccinated individuals with verbal confirmed infection ("gold standard hybrid positives"); and 2024 household samples ("unknowns").
resultsWuhan spike protein showed a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 0.88-1.0) in detecting omicron-specific antibodies using gold standard omicron positives with JN.1 spike protein as a reference assay. Overall, across all samples, in ELISA, the Wuhan antigen had a sensitivity of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.89-0.95) and a specificity of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.94-0.99). The JN.1 antigen showed a sensitivity of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87-0.94) and a specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.93-0.99). In Luminex, sensitivity was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.91-0.97) for Wuhan and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91-0.96) for JN.1. Specificity for both antigens in Luminex was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.94-0.99).
conclusionsBoth ELISA and Luminex assays showed comparable sensitivity and specificity for both Wuhan and JN.1 antigens, indicating that mutations in the JN.1 variant do not significantly impact assay performance. This suggests preserved antigenic recognition across variants.
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.