Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 May 19;10(5):319.
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics10050319.

Antibody Tests in Detecting SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Meta-Analysis

Panagiota I Kontou  1 , Georgia G Braliou  1 , Niki L Dimou  2 , Georgios Nikolopoulos  3 , Pantelis G Bagos  1
Affiliations

Antibody Tests in Detecting SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Meta-Analysis

Panagiota I Kontou et al. Diagnostics (Basel). .

Abstract

The emergence of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 made imperative the need for diagnostic tests that can identify the infection. Although Nucleic Acid Test (NAT) is considered to be the gold standard, serological tests based on antibodies could be very helpful. However, individual studies are usually inconclusive, thus, a comparison of different tests is needed. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis in PubMed, medRxiv and bioRxiv. We used the bivariate method for meta-analysis of diagnostic tests pooling sensitivities and specificities. We evaluated IgM and IgG tests based on Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), Chemiluminescence Enzyme Immunoassays (CLIA), Fluorescence Immunoassays (FIA), and the Lateral Flow Immunoassays (LFIA). We identified 38 studies containing data from 7848 individuals. Tests using the S antigen are more sensitive than N antigen-based tests. IgG tests perform better compared to IgM ones and show better sensitivity when the samples were taken longer after the onset of symptoms. Moreover, a combined IgG/IgM test seems to be a better choice in terms of sensitivity than measuring either antibody alone. All methods yield high specificity with some of them (ELISA and LFIA) reaching levels around 99%. ELISA- and CLIA-based methods perform better in terms of sensitivity (90%-94%) followed by LFIA and FIA with sensitivities ranging from 80% to 89%. ELISA tests could be a safer choice at this stage of the pandemic. LFIA tests are more attractive for large seroprevalence studies but show lower sensitivity, and this should be taken into account when designing and performing seroprevalence studies.

Keywords: COVID-19; ELISA; IgG; IgM; SARS-CoV-2; antibody test.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Pooled sensitivity of antibody tests obtained from meta-analysis. For the details see Table 2 and the Results section.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Pooled specificity of antibody tests obtained from meta-analysis. For the details see Table 2 and the Results section.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Chan J.F.-W., Yuan S., Kok K.-H., To K.K.-W., Chu H., Yang J., Xing F., Liu J., Yip C.C.-Y., Poon R.W.-S., et al. A familial cluster of pneumonia associated with the 2019 novel coronavirus indicating person-to-person transmission: A study of a family cluster. Lancet. 2020;395:514–523. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30154-9. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wu F., Zhao S., Yu B., Chen Y.M., Wang W., Song Z.G., Hu Y., Tao Z.W., Tian J.H., Pei Y.Y., et al. A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China. Nature. 2020;579:265–269. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2008-3. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sohrabi C., Alsafi Z., O’Neill N., Khan M., Kerwan A., Al-Jabir A., Iosifidis C., Agha R. World Health Organization declares global emergency: A review of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) Int. J. Surg. 2020;76:71–76. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.02.034. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Liu J., Zheng X., Tong Q., Li W., Wang B., Sutter K., Trilling M., Lu M., Dittmer U., Yang D. Overlapping and discrete aspects of the pathology and pathogenesis of the emerging human pathogenic coronaviruses SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and 2019-nCoV. J. Med. Virol. 2020;92:491–494. doi: 10.1002/jmv.25709. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Promislow D.E.L. A geroscience perspective on COVID-19 mortality. J. Gerontol. Ser. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2020 doi: 10.1093/gerona/glaa094. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources