Analytical and clinical performances of five immunoassays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in comparison with neutralization activity

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.08.01.20166546: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: The study protocol (number 23307) was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University-Hospital, Padova.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variable, 21 autoimmune patients, 8 pregnant women) were included in the study (Table 1).
    Cell Line Authenticationnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    In the same samples, a high-throughput PRNT method was developed for the fast and accurate quantification of neutralizing antibodies in plasma samples collected from patients exposed to SARS-CoV-2.
    SARS-CoV-2
    suggested: None
    Visualization of plaques was obtained with an immunocytochemical staining method using an anti-dsRNA monoclonal antibody (J2, 1:10,000; Scicons) for 1 hour, followed by 1-hour incubation with peroxidase-labeled goat anti-mouse antibodies (1:1000; DAKO) and a 7-minute incubation with the True Blue™ (KPL) peroxidase substrate.
    anti-dsRNA
    suggested: (Millipore Cat# MABE1134, RRID:AB_2819101)
    J2
    suggested: (US Biological Cat# U1000-87M, RRID:AB_2210756)
    anti-mouse
    suggested: None
    Experimental Models: Cell Lines
    SentencesResources
    Fifty microliters of the virus–serum mixtures were added to confluent monolayers of Vero E6 cells, in 96-wells plates and incubated for 1 hour at 37□°C, in a 5% CO2 incubator.
    Vero E6
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    ; SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Abbott Laboratories, IL, USA) and one enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (ENZY-WELL SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Diesse Diagnostica Senese, Siena, Italy).
    Abbott Laboratories
    suggested: None
    The GraphPad Prism version 8.4.1 for Windows (GraphPad Software, LLC) was employed to evaluate plaque reduction neutralization test results, using non-parametric tests (Kruskall-Wallis test and Spearman’s correlation).
    GraphPad Prism
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)
    GraphPad
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)
    Stata v13.1 (Statacorp, Lakeway Drive, TX, USA) was used to evaluate the assays’ clinical performances.
    Statacorp
    suggested: None

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    The present paper has limitations: first, neutralizing antibodies were tested in a limited number of samples the procedure being very complex; second, COVID-19 positive patients were selected retrospectively on the basis of available leftover samples; therefore NPV and PPV could be overestimated. Finally, the relationship between IgM antibodies and neutralizing activity should be studied further in a larger series of patients. In conclusion, although the performances of SARS-CoV-2 antibody immunoassays are of analytical and clinical value, they could be enhanced by considering the test purposes, emphasizing sensitivity in the screening and specificity in the second-line testing. In addition, a further search should be made for a better dynamic range and a stronger correlation with respect to antibody neutralization activity, in order to, above all, obtain information needed for effective passive antibody therapy and vaccine development against SARS-CoV-2 virus.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.