4.4 Article

The Antibody Response to SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Journal

OPEN FORUM INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 7, Issue 9, Pages -

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofaa387

Keywords

antibody; COVID-19; diagnosis; SARS-CoV-2; serology

Funding

  1. New South Wales Government's Office for Health and Medical Research
  2. Snow Medical Research Foundation
  3. National Health and Medical Research Council's Australian Partnership for Preparedness Research on Infectious Disease Emergencies
  4. National Health and Medical Research Council's Centre of Research Excellence in Emerging Infectious Diseases

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific antibodies has become an important tool, complementing nucleic acid tests (NATs) for diagnosis and for determining the prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in population serosurveys. The magnitude and persistence of antibody responses are critical for assessing the duration of immunity. Methods. A SARS-CoV-2-specific immunofluorescent antibody (IFA) assay for immunoglobulin G (IgG), immunoglobulin A (IgA), and immunoglobulin M (IgM) was developed and prospectively evaluated by comparison to the reference standard of NAT on respiratory tract samples from individuals with suspected COVID-19. Neutralizing antibody responses were measured in a subset of samples using a standard microneutralization assay. Results. A total of 2753 individuals were eligible for the study (126 NAT-positive; prevalence, 4.6%). The median window period from illness onset to appearance of antibodies (range) was 10.2 (5.8-14.4) days. The sensitivity and specificity of either SARS-CoV-2 IgG, IgA, or IgM when collected >= 14 days after symptom onset were 91.3% (95% CI, 84.9%-95.6%) and 98.9% (95% CI, 98.4%-99.3%), respectively. The negative predictive value was 99.6% (95% CI, 99.3%-99.8%). The positive predictive value of detecting any antibody class was 79.9% (95% CI, 73.3%-85.1%); this increased to 96.8% (95% CI, 90.796-99.0%) for the combination of IgG and IgA. Conclusions. Measurement of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody by IFA is an accurate method to diagnose COVID-19. Serological testing should be incorporated into diagnostic algorithms for SARS-CoV-2 infection to identify additional cases where NAT was not performed and resolve cases where false-negative and false-positive NAFs are suspected. The majority of individuals develop robust antibody responses following infection, but the duration of these responses and implications for immunity remain to be established.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available