Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 serological tests with different antigen targets

  1. Alix T. Coste
  2. Katia Jaton
  3. Matthaios Papadimitriou-Olivgeris
  4. Gilbert Greub
  5. Antony Croxatto

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104690
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.09.20149864: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analyses: Sensitivity and specificity with 95% CI (Wilson/Brown method of GraphPad Prism 8.3.0) were calculated with Excel and GraphPad prims.
    GraphPad Prism
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)
    Excel
    suggested: None
    GraphPad
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)

    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 main limitation of this study is that expected positive sera were collected only during the first two month post-symptoms from hospitalized patients presenting moderate to severe symptoms. Our conclusion can thus only be applied to severe clinical presentation and for sera collected during the first two month post-symptoms. Previous studies on other coronavirus [4], or on SARS-CoV-2 [14] suggest that the anti-N antibody response may appeared earlier or simultaneously than the anti-S response and may also waned more rapidly [15]. This implies that the performance of anti-N and anti-S serological tests may be similar during the acute phase of the CoviD-19 disease as this was assessed in this study but that sera from pauci-symptomatic subjects and/or collected more than two month post-exposition may only present a detectable anti-S antibody response. The anti-N response could be helpful to date the infection since presence of anti-N antibodies would suggest a recent infection. Conversely, anti-S antibody production may be used during all infectious and post-infectious phases, the anti-N and anti-S serological tests being complementary. This study has identified several SARS-CoV-2 tests exhibiting very good performances of sensitivity and specificity from sera collected from hospitalized patients up to 30-60 days post-symptoms. The SARS-CoV-2 serology may be used as a complement to SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR for the diagnostic of CoviD-19 and for population sero-prevalence studies. Fo...

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.07.09.20149864v1 on medRxiv