Comparison of the clinical performance and usefulness of five SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests

dc.contributor.authorWakita, Mitsuru
dc.contributor.authorIdei, Mayumi
dc.contributor.authorSaito, Kaori
dc.contributor.authorHoriuchi, Yuki
dc.contributor.authorYamatani, Kotoko
dc.contributor.authorIshikawa, Suzuka
dc.contributor.authorYamamoto, Takamasa
dc.contributor.authorIgawa, Gene
dc.contributor.authorHinata, Masanobu
dc.contributor.authorKadota, Katsuhiko
dc.contributor.authorKurosawa, Taro
dc.contributor.authorTakahashi, Sho
dc.contributor.authorSaito, Takumi
dc.contributor.authorMisawa, Shigeki
dc.contributor.authorAkazawa, Chihiro
dc.contributor.authorNaito, Toshio
dc.contributor.authorMilda, Takashi
dc.contributor.authorTakahashi, Kazuhisa
dc.contributor.authorAi, Tomohiko
dc.contributor.authorTabe, Yoko
dc.contributor.departmentMedicine, School of Medicineen_US
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-16T16:43:54Z
dc.date.available2021-04-16T16:43:54Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.description.abstractWe examined the usefulness of five COVID-19 antibody detection tests using 114 serum samples at various time points from 34 Japanese COVID-19 patients. We examined Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 from Roche, and four immunochromatography tests from Hangzhou Laihe Biotech, Artron Laboratories, Chil, and Nadal. In the first week after onset, Elecsys had 40% positivity in Group S (severe cases) but was negative in Group M (mild-moderate cases). The immunochromatography kits showed 40–60% and 0–8% positivity in Groups S and M, respectively. In the second week, Elecsys showed 75% and 50% positivity, and the immunochromatography tests showed 5–80% and 50–75% positivity in Groups S and M, respectively. After the third week, Elecsys showed 100% positivity in both groups. The immunochromatography kits showed 100% positivity in Group S. In Group M, positivity decreased to 50% for Chil and 75–89% for Artron and Lyher. Elecsys and immunochromatography kits had 91–100% specificity. Elecsys had comparable chronological change of cut-off index values in the two groups from the second week to the sixth week. The current SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection tests do not provide meaningful interpretation of severity and infection status. Its use might be limited to short-term epidemiological studies.en_US
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen_US
dc.identifier.citationWakita, M., Idei, M., Saito, K., Horiuchi, Y., Yamatani, K., Ishikawa, S., ... & Tabe, Y. (2021). Comparison of the clinical performance and usefulness of five SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests. Plos one, 16(2), e0246536. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246536en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/25664
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherPloSen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1371/journal.pone.0246536en_US
dc.relation.journalPloS Oneen_US
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.sourcePublisheren_US
dc.subjectCOVID-19en_US
dc.subjectSARS-CoV-2en_US
dc.subjectantibody detection testsen_US
dc.titleComparison of the clinical performance and usefulness of five SARS-CoV-2 antibody testsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Wakita2021Comparison.pdf
Size:
719.95 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: