Diagnostic efficiency of three fully automated serology assays and their correlation with a novel surrogate virus neutralization test in symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-COV-2 individuals

35Citations
Citations of this article
45Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

To support the deployment of serology assays for population screening during the COVID-19 pandemic, we compared the performance of three fully automated SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays: Mindray CL-900i® (target: spike [S] and nucleocapsid [N]), BioMérieux VIDAS®3 (target: receptor- binding domain [RBD]) and Diasorin LIAISON®XL (target: S1 and S2 subunits). A total of 111 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR- positive samples collected at ≥ 21 days post symptom onset, and 127 prepandemic control samples were included. Diagnostic performance was assessed in correlation to RT-PCR and a surrogate virus-neutralizing test (sVNT). Moreover, cross-reactivity with other viral antibodies was investigated. Compared to RT-PCR, LIAISON®XL showed the highest overall specificity (100%), followed by VIDAS®3 (98.4%) and CL-900i® (95.3%). The highest sensitivity was demonstrated by CL-900i® (90.1%), followed by VIDAS®3 (88.3%) and LIAISON®XL (85.6%). The sensitivity of all assays was higher in symptomatic patients (91.1-98.2%) compared to asymptomatic patients (78.4-80.4%). In correlation to sVNT, all assays showed excellent sensitivities (92.2-96.1%).In addition, VIDAS®3 demonstrated the best correlation (r = 0.75) with the sVNT. The present study provides insights on the performance of three fully automated assays, which could help diagnostic laboratories in the choice of a particular assay according to the intended use.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Younes, S., Al-Jighefee, H., Shurrab, F., Al-Sadeq, D. W., Younes, N., Dargham, S. R., … Nasrallah, G. K. (2021). Diagnostic efficiency of three fully automated serology assays and their correlation with a novel surrogate virus neutralization test in symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-COV-2 individuals. Microorganisms, 9(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9020245

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free