Evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 Surrogate Virus Neutralization Test for Detection of Antibody in Human, Canine, Cat, and Hamster Sera

  1. Ranawaka A. P. M. Perera
  2. Ronald Ko
  3. Owen T. Y. Tsang
  4. David S. C. Hui
  5. Mike Y. M. Kwan
  6. Christopher J. Brackman
  7. Esther M. W. To
  8. Hui-ling Yen
  9. Kathy Leung
  10. Samuel M. S. Cheng
  11. Kin Ho Chan
  12. Karl C. K. Chan
  13. Ka-Chi Li
  14. Linda Saif
  15. Vanessa R. Barrs
  16. Joseph T. Wu
  17. Thomas H. C. Sit
  18. Leo L. M. Poon
  19. Malik Peiris

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Surrogate neutralization assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that can be done without biosafety level 3 containment and in multiple species are desirable. We evaluate a recently developed surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) in comparison to 90% plaque reduction neutralization tests (PRNT 90 ) in human, canine, cat, and hamster sera. With PRNT 90 as the reference, sVNT had sensitivity of 98.9% and specificity of 98.8%. Using a panel of immune sera corresponding to other coronaviruses, we confirm the lack of cross-reactivity to other coronaviruses in SARS-CoV-2 sVNT and PRNT 90 , except for cross-reactivity to SARS-CoV-1 in sVNT.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1128/jcm.02504-20
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.28.20163592: (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

    No key resources detected.

    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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.28.20163592: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementEthical statement: Ethical statement: Collection of serum from patients with COVID-19 and healthy blood donor sera in 2017 was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Kowloon West Cluster reference No. KW/EX-20-039 (144-27) of the Hospital Authority of Hong Kong and the Institutional Review Board of The Hong Kong University and the Hong Kong Island West Cluster of Hospitals (IRB reference number UW16-254), respectively.Randomizationnot detected.Blindingnot detected.Power Analysisnot detected.Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    ELISA testing for antibody in other animal species requires assays to be re-optimized with the relevant species-specific anti-Ig-conjugate for detecting immunoglobulins of each species.
    anti-Ig-conjugate
    suggested: None
    This assay would be of great utility as a species independent assay for primary testing for SARS-CoV antibodies in humans of animals or for independent confirmati of sera giving positive ELISA antibody results.
    SARS-CoV
    suggested: None

    Data from additional tools added to each annotation on a weekly basis.

    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 is not a substitute for expert review. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers) in the manuscript, and detects sentences that appear to be missing RRIDs. SciScore also checks to make sure that rigor criteria are addressed by authors. It does this by detecting sentences that discuss criteria such as blinding or power analysis. SciScore does not guarantee that the rigor criteria that it detects are appropriate for the particular study. Instead it assists authors, editors, and reviewers by drawing attention to sections of the manuscript that contain or should contain various rigor criteria and key resources. For details on the results shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  4. Version published to 10.1101/2020.07.28.20163592v1 on medRxiv