PLoS ONE (Jan 2021)

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

  • Mitsuru Wakita,
  • Mayumi Idei,
  • Kaori Saito,
  • Yuki Horiuchi,
  • Kotoko Yamatani,
  • Suzuka Ishikawa,
  • Takamasa Yamamoto,
  • Gene Igawa,
  • Masanobu Hinata,
  • Katsuhiko Kadota,
  • Taro Kurosawa,
  • Sho Takahashi,
  • Takumi Saito,
  • Shigeki Misawa,
  • Chihiro Akazawa,
  • Toshio Naito,
  • Takashi Miida,
  • Kazuhisa Takahashi,
  • Tomohiko Ai,
  • Yoko Tabe

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246536
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 16, no. 2
p. e0246536

Abstract

Read online

We 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.