Next Article in Journal
MRI-Based Radiomics Analysis for Intraoperative Risk Assessment in Gravid Patients at High Risk with Placenta Accreta Spectrum
Previous Article in Journal
Editorial of Special Issue “Multiple Sclerosis: From Diagnostic Biomarkers to Imaging and Clinical Predictors”
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Brief Report

Harmonization of Determination of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies: Is It Always Possible?

Laboratory Medicine Unit, Ospedale dell’Angelo, and Regional Center for Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Pathology, Azienda ULSS 3 Serenissima, Mestre, 30122 Venice, Italy
Diagnostics 2022, 12(2), 483; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12020483
Submission received: 22 January 2022 / Revised: 5 February 2022 / Accepted: 10 February 2022 / Published: 14 February 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease)

Abstract

A WHO standard was prepared with the aim of harmonizing assays detecting antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, but the issue is currently being debated. We re-evaluated a previously studied set of cases (108 specimens of 48 patients and 60 specimens of 20 vaccinated subjects, collected after 14 days from the first dose and 14 days and 3 months after a second dose of the Comirnaty BNT162b2 vaccine), calculating the ratios between the results of two methods (SARS-CoV-2 IgG anti-RBD, SNIBE, and anti-SARS-CoV-2 QuantiVac ELISA IgG, Euroimmun). In the vaccinated subjects, the ratios of the results between methods according to the WHO standard were relatively dispersed, but the harmonization results were good. On the other hand, in patient samples, the variability between tests was very high, and the harmonization was unsatisfactory (median ratios between methods 2.23, 10th–90th percentile: 1.1–5.6). Interestingly, in patient samples, the harmonization depends on the time from the onset of symptoms and greatly improves after 6 months since the diagnosis. Forty patient specimens and thirty-one of the vaccinated subjects after the second dose were also evaluated with a third method (Access SARS-CoV-2 IgG (1st IS), Beckman Coulter), obtaining a similar trend. We can conclude that the actual effectiveness of harmonization between methods may vary depending on the scenario in which they will be used.
Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; antibodies assays; harmonization; COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2; antibodies assays; harmonization; COVID-19

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Dittadi, R. Harmonization of Determination of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies: Is It Always Possible? Diagnostics 2022, 12, 483. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12020483

AMA Style

Dittadi R. Harmonization of Determination of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies: Is It Always Possible? Diagnostics. 2022; 12(2):483. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12020483

Chicago/Turabian Style

Dittadi, Ruggero. 2022. "Harmonization of Determination of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies: Is It Always Possible?" Diagnostics 12, no. 2: 483. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12020483

APA Style

Dittadi, R. (2022). Harmonization of Determination of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies: Is It Always Possible? Diagnostics, 12(2), 483. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12020483

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop