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 Aug 25;19(5):1281-1288.
doi: 10.5114/aoms.2020.98361. eCollection 2023.

A comparison of 7 commercial anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody immunoassays

Jakub Swadźba  1   2 , Maciej Bednarczyk  2 , Tomasz Anyszek  1   2 , Emilia Martin  2
Affiliations

A comparison of 7 commercial anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody immunoassays

Jakub Swadźba et al. Arch Med Sci. .

Abstract

Introduction: Serological testing in SARS-CoV-2 infection is gaining both patients' and clinicians' attention. Antibody assessment has potential multidirectional utility, hampered by the scarcity of clinical validation studies of the tests available on the market. Therefore, this study aimed to provide some evidence on the clinical utility of anti-SARS-CoV-2 commercial assays, based on the comparison of the results obtained with different methods.

Material and methods: The study included 52 samples from patients and healthy volunteers. The control samples (n = 20) were obtained during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The case cohort consisted of 32 consecutive patients referred to the Diagnostyka medical laboratory for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. For the purpose of this study, the MAGLUMI chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) was chosen as a comparative method. All samples were tested with this method, as well as with the Euroimmun enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and five different lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs).

Results: The results obtained in this study provide evidence for high overall concordance between the comparative CLIA method and both ELISA and different LFIAs. The agreement between CLIA and LFIAs was 92.3-98.0% for IgG and 90.0-96.1% for IgM, depending on the kit. The concordance between CLIA and ELISA was 92.3% for IgG and 75.0% for IgA (compared to the MAGLUMI CLIA IgM).

Conclusions: The results obtained in this study provide evidence for high overall concordance between the comparative CLIA method and different LFIAs. This could justify the use of LFIAs in some settings, where automated assays are not available, provided that some limitations are considered.

Keywords: COVID-19; chemiluminescent immunoassay; enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; lateral flow immunoassay.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Nabavi S, Habtemariam S, Clementi E, et al. . Lessons learned from SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV: FDA-approved Abelson tyrosine-protein kinase 2 inhibitors may help us combat SARS-CoV-2. Arch Med Sci 2020; 16: 519-21. - PMC - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization . Laboratory testing for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in suspected human cases: interim guidance. 19.03.2020. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/331501.
    1. Zhao J, Yuan Q, Wang H, et al. . Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel coronavirus disease 2019. Clin Infect Dis 2020; 71: 2027-34. - PMC - PubMed
    1. To KK, Tsang OT, Leung WS, et al. . Temporal profiles of viral load in posterior oropharyngeal saliva samples and serum antibody responses during infection by SARS-CoV-2: an observational cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis 2020; 20: 565-74. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Long QX, Liu BZ, Deng HJ, et al. . Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients with COVID-19. Nat Med 2020; 26: 845-8. - PubMed