Original Article2021-11-01 Diagnostic Immunology
Sojeong Yun 
, B.S., Ji Hyeong Ryu , M.S., Joo Hee Jang , B.S., Hyunjoo Bae , M.S., Seung-Hyo Yoo , M.T., Ae-Ran Choi , M.T., Sung Jin Jo , M.D., Jihyang Lim , M.D., Jehoon Lee , M.D., Hyejin Ryu , M.D., Sung-Yeon Cho , M.D., Dong-Gun Lee , M.D., Jongmin Lee , M.D., Seok Chan Kim , M.D., Yeon-Joon Park , M.D., Hyeyoung Lee , M.D., and Eun-Jee Oh , M.D.
Abstract : Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody assays have high clinical utility in managing the pandemic. We compared antibody responses and seroconversion of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients using different immunoassays. Methods: We evaluated 12 commercial immunoassays, including three automated chemiluminescent immunoassays (Abbott, Roche, and Siemens), three enzyme immunoassays (Bio-Rad, Euroimmun, and Vircell), five lateral flow immunoassays (Boditech Med, SD biosensor, PCL, Sugentech, and Rapigen), and one surrogate neutralizing antibody assay (GenScript) in sequential samples from 49 COVID-19 patients and 10 seroconversion panels. Results: The positive percent agreement (PPA) of assays for a COVID-19 diagnosis ranged from 84.0% to 98.5% for all samples (>14 days after symptom onset), with IgM or IgA assays showing higher PPAs. Seroconversion responses varied across the assay type and disease severity. Assays targeting the spike or receptor-binding domain protein showed a tendency for early seroconversion detection and higher index values in patients with severe disease. Index values from SARS-CoV-2 binding antibody assays (three automated assays, one LFIA, and three EIAs) showed moderate to strong correlations with the neutralizing antibody percentage (r=0.517–0.874), and stronger correlations in patients with severe disease and in assays targeting spike protein. Agreement among the 12 assays was good (74.3%–96.4%) for detecting IgG or total antibodies. Conclusions: Positivity rates and seroconversion of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies vary depending on the assay kits, disease severity, and antigen target. This study contributes to a better understanding of antibody response in symptomatic COVID-19 patients using currently available assays.
Brief Communication2022-01-01 Diagnostic Immunology
Hyung Woo Kim , M.D., Mikyoung Park , M.D., Ph.D., and Jong Ho Lee , M.D.
Abstract : Standard tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detect the presence of viral RNA using real-time reverse transcription (rRT)-PCR. Recently, convenient, rapid, and relatively inexpensive SARS-CoV-2 antigen (Ag) detection methods have been developed. The STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag test (SD Biosensor, Inc., Suwon, Korea) is a rapid immunochromatography test that qualitatively detects the nucleocapsid protein of SARS-CoV-2 using gold conjugated antibodies. We evaluated its performance in comparison with that of Allplex 2019-nCoV Assay (Seegene, Seoul, Korea) in a retrospective case-control study using residual samples. The sensitivity and specificity of the STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag test were 89.2% (58/65) and 96.0% (96/100), respectively. Cycle threshold (Ct) values for the three target SARS-CoV-2 genes (envelope, RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, and nucleocapsid genes) included in Allplex 2019-nCoV Assay were significantly lower in Ag test-positive patients than in Ag test-negative patients (P
Original Article2021-11-01 Diagnostic Immunology
Kotaro Aoki , Ph.D., Kunitomo Takai , M.H.E.S., Tatsuya Nagasawa , M.M.S., Katsuhito Kashiwagi , M.D., Nobuaki Mori , M.D., Ph.D., Keiji Matsubayashi , M.S., Masahiro Satake , M.D., Ph.D., Ippei Tanaka , Ph.D., Nanae Kodama , M.S., Takahiro Shimodaira , M.M.S, Yoshikazu Ishii , Ph.D., Taito Miyazaki , M.D., Toshiaki Ishii , M.M.S, Toshisuke Morita , M.D., Ph.D., Toru Yoshimura , Ph.D., and Kazuhiro Tateda , M.D., Ph.D.
Abstract : Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is generally diagnosed by reverse transcription (RT)-PCR or serological assays. The SARS-CoV-2 viral load decreases a few days after symptom onset. Thus, the RT-PCR sensitivity peaks at three days after symptom onset (approximately 80%). We evaluated the performance of the ARCHITECT® SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay (henceforth termed IgG assay; Abbott Laboratories, Lake County, IL, USA), and the combination of RT-PCR and the IgG assay for COVID-19 diagnosis. Methods: In this retrospective study, 206 samples from 70 COVID-19 cases at two hospitals in Tokyo that were positive using RT-PCR were used to analyze the diagnostic sensitivity. RT-PCR-negative (N=166), COVID-19-unrelated (N=418), and Japanese Red Cross Society (N=100) samples were used to evaluate specificity. Results: Sensitivity increased daily after symptom onset and exceeded 84.4% after 10 days. Specificity ranged from 98.2% to 100% for samples from the three case groups. Seroconversion was confirmed from 9 to 20 days after symptom onset in 18 out of 32 COVID-19 cases with multiple samples and from another case with a positive result in the IgG assay for the first available sample. Conclusions: The combination of RT-PCR and IgG assay improves the robustness of laboratory diagnostics by compensating for the limitations of each method.
Original Article2022-01-01 Diagnostic Immunology
Younhee Park , M.D., Ki Ho Hong , M.D., Su-Kyung Lee , M.S., Jungwon Hyun , M.D., Eun-Jee Oh , M.D., Jaehyeon Lee , M.D., Hyukmin Lee , M.D., Sang Hoon Song , M.D., Seung-Jung Kee , M.D., Gye Cheol Kwon , M.D., Su Hwan Kim , B.S., Hyeon-Nam Do , M.S., Ah-Ra Kim , M.S., June-Woo Lee , Ph.D., Sung Soon Kim , Ph.D., and Hyun Soo Kim , M.D., Ph.D.
Abstract : Background: Seroprevalence studies of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, including asymptomatic and past infections, are important to estimate the scale of the disease outbreak and to establish quarantine measures. We evaluated the clinical performance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody assays available in Korea for use in seroprevalence studies. Methods: The sensitivity, specificity, cross-reactivity, and interference of five SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays were evaluated using the following: 398 serum samples from confirmed COVID-19 patients, 510 negative control samples from before 2018 (pre-pandemic), 163 serum samples from patients with SARS, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and other viral infections, and five samples for the interference study. Results: The sensitivities of the five assays ranged from 92.2% to 98%, and their specificities, including cross-reactivity and interference, ranged from 97.5% to 100%. The agreement rates were excellent (kappa >0.9). Adjustment of the cutoff values could be considered through ROC curve analysis. The positive predictive values of the individual assays varied from 3.5% to 100% at a 0.1% prevalence but were as high as ≥95% when two assays were combined. Conclusions: The prevalence of COVID-19 in Korea is considered to be exceptionally low at present; thus, we recommend using a combination of two or more SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays rather than a single assay. These results could help select SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays for COVID-19 seroprevalence studies in Korea.
Original Article2022-01-01 Diagnostic Immunology
Sumi Yoon , M.D., Hee-Won Moon , M.D., Ph.D., Hanah Kim , M.D., Ph.D., Mina Hur , M.D., Ph.D., and Yeo-Min Yun , M.D., Ph.D.
Abstract : Background: Recently, two fully automated immunoassays for antinuclear antibody (ANA) screening were introduced: EliA CTD Screen (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Freiburg, Germany) and QUANTA Flash CTD Screen Plus (Inova Diagnostics, San Diego, USA). We evaluated their clinical performance in comparison with the indirect immunofluorescence assay (IIFA) and analyzed samples with discrepant results. Methods: In total, 406 serum samples (206 from patients undergoing routine checkups and 200 from rheumatology clinic patients) were assayed using EliA, QUANTA Flash, and IIFA. We evaluated assay concordance and agreement and confirmed the presence of anti-extractable nuclear antigen (ENA) antibodies in samples with discrepant automated immunoassay and IIFA results. Additionally, we compared the clinical performance of each assay in diagnosing ANA-associated rheumatic disease (AARD) and adjusted the cut-off values. Results: In rheumatology clinic samples, the concordance and agreement were 91.5% and strong between EliA and QUANTA Flash, 79.0% and weak between EliA and IIFA, and 80.5% and moderate between QUANTA Flash and IIFA, respectively. In automated immunoassay-positive, IIFA-negative samples (N=15), all anti-ENA antibodies detected (6/15) were anti-Sjögren’s syndrome antigen A/Ro (Ro60) antibodies. The automated immunoassays and IIFA showed high accuracy for diagnosing AARD, and adjusted cut-off values improved their sensitivities (EliA with 0.56 ratio, 82.9% sensitivity; QUANTA Flash with 9.7 chemiluminescent units, 87.8% sensitivity). Conclusions: The two automated immunoassays showed reliable performance compared with IIFA and can be efficiently used with the IIFA in clinical immunology laboratories. Clinical cut-off values can be adjusted according to the workflow in each laboratory.
Original Article2022-03-01 Diagnostic Immunology
Mina Hur , M.D., Ph.D., Mikyoung Park , M.D., Ph.D., Hee-Won Moon , M.D., Ph.D., Won Hyeok Choe , M.D., Ph.D., and Chae Hoon Lee , M.D., Ph.D.
Abstract : Background: Non-invasive clinical algorithms for the detection of liver fibrosis (LF) can reduce the need for liver biopsy (LB). We explored the implementation of two serum biomarkers, enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) and Mac-2 binding protein glycosylation isomer (M2BPGi), in clinical algorithms for LF in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. Methods: Two clinical algorithms were applied to 152 CHB patients: (1) transient elastography (TE) followed by biomarkers (TE/ELF and TE/M2GPGi); (2) biomarker test followed by TE (ELF/TE and M2BPGi/TE). Using the cut-off value or index for the detection of advanced LF (TE≥F3; 9.8 in ELF and 3.0 in M2BPGi), LB was expected to be performed in cases with discordant TE and biomarker results. Results: In both algorithms, the expected number of LBs was lower when using M2BPGi than when using ELF (TE/ELF or ELF/TE, 13.2% [N=20]; TE/M2BPGi or M2BPGi/TE, 9.9% [N=15]), although there was no statistical difference (P=0.398). In the TE low-risk group (TE≤F2), the discordance rate was significantly lower in the TE/M2BPGi approach than in the TE/ELF approach (1.5% [2/136] vs. 11.0% [15/136], P=0.002). In the biomarker low-risk group, there was no significant difference between the ELF/TE and M2BPGi/TE approaches (3.9% [5/126] vs. 8.8% [13/147], P=0.118). Conclusions: Both ELF and M2BPGi can be implemented in non-invasive clinical algorithms for assessing LF in CHB patients. Given the lowest possibility of losing advanced LF cases in the low-risk group when using the TE/M2BPGi approach, this combination seems useful in clinical practice.
Original Article2022-01-01 Diagnostic Immunology
Aera Han , M.D., Ph.D., Borum Suh , M.D., Gwang Yi , M.D., Yoo Jin Lee , M.D., and Sung Eun Kim , M.D.
Abstract : Background: Since 2017, automated assays have been used in most clinical laboratories for anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level measurement. We evaluated the analytical performance of the newly developed automated fluorescent immunoassay system (AFIAS) AMH assay (Boditech Med, Gangwon-do, Korea) in comparison with the Roche Elecsys and Beckman Coulter Access 2 AMH assays. Methods: Analytical performance of the AFIAS AMH assay was assessed in terms of linearity, repeatability, and within-laboratory precision (CV%) using human recombinant AMH samples according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines EP05 and EP06. Using 293 serum samples collected from an infertility clinic, the AMH levels were compared across AFIAS, Elecsys, and Access 2 AMH assays according to the CLSI EP09 guidelines. Results: The AFIAS AMH assay results were linear across the measurement range of 0.420–72.386 pmol/L AMH, with repeatability of 6.341%. CV% of the AFIAS AMH assay for three levels of control, 1.786, 7.143, and 56.857 pmol/L, were 5.801%, 5.714%, and 6.228%, respectively. The results of the three AMH assays showed strong correlation: AFIAS and Elecsys [slope, 1.055 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.022–1.088) and Spearman’s rho, 0.978 (95% CI, 0.973–0.983)], Elecsys and Access 2 [slope, 0.813 (95% CI, 0.791–0.834) and Spearman’s rho, 0.986 (95% CI, 0.983–0.989)], and AFIAS and Access 2 [slope, 0.836 (95% CI, 0.821–0.853) and Spearman’s rho, 0.984 (95% CI, 0.980–0.988)]. Conclusions: The AFIAS AMH assay may be an alternative to the Roche Elecsys and Beckman Coulter Access 2 AMH assays.
Original Article2022-01-01 Diagnostic Immunology
Ji Won In , M.D., Kiwook Jung , M.D., Sue Shin , M.D., Ph.D., Kyoung Un Park , M.D., Ph.D., Hajeong Lee , M.D., Ph.D., and Eun Young Song , M.D., Ph.D.
Abstract : Background: Associations between IgA nephropathy (IgAN) and HLA-DRB1 and -DQB1 alleles have been reported in several ethnic groups. We investigated the association of HLA-DRB1 and -DQB1 alleles with the predisposition for IgAN and disease progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in Korean patients. Methods: We analyzed HLA-DRB1 and -DQB1 genotypes in 399 IgAN patients between January 2000 and January 2019 using a LIFECODES sequence-specific oligonucleotide (SSO) typing kit (Immucor, Stamford, CT, USA) or a LABType SSO Typing Test (One Lambda, Canoga Park, CA, USA). Alleles with a significant difference in two-digit resolution were further analyzed using in-house sequence-based typing and sequence-specific primer PCR. As controls, 613 healthy hematopoietic stem cell donors were included. Kidney survival was analyzed in 281 IgAN patients with available clinical and laboratory data using Cox regression analysis. Where needed, P-values were adjusted using Bonferroni correction. Results: The allele frequencies of HLA-DRB1*04:05 (corrected P [Pc]
Original Article2022-07-01 Diagnostic Immunology
Younhee Park , M.D., Ph.D., Juhye Roh , M.D., Ph.D., and Sinyoung Kim , M.D., Ph.D.
Abstract : Background: Accurate and consistent viral load (VL) quantitation of HIV type 1 (HIV-1), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) is important for diagnosis and clinical monitoring. Assay results have to be concordant and compatible across laboratories. We evaluated the performance of three Aptima assays (Hologic, San Diego, CA, USA) and compared their VL values with corresponding cobas 6800 assay (Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany) results, using 840 clinical samples. Methods: The correlation between VL results obtained using the two assays was evaluated in terms of analytical sensitivity, precision/reproducibility, linearity, and cross-reactivity. Agreement rates were determined using kappa statistics. The overall agreement of VL values was examined using Passing–Bablok regression analysis. Results: All CVs were within 5%; the assays had good precision for detecting all three viruses. The linearity of quantitation assessed using three AccuSpan linearity panels (Seracare, Milford, MA, USA), was excellent for the Aptima assays. For HIV-1 and HCV, the results of both assays showed excellent agreement (κ=0.89 and 0.90, respectively) while for HBV, the results showed good agreement (κ=0.69). For analytical sensitivity, the VLs required for a 100% detection rate of HIV-1, HBV, and HCV were 20 copies/mL, 7.5 IU/mL, and 5.0 IU/mL, respectively. The results for HIV-1, HBV, and HCV obtained using both assays correlated strongly (R2=0.97, 0.93, and 0.95, respectively). Conclusions: The cobas 6800 and Aptima assays, with fully automated and high-throughput molecular platforms for HIV-1, HBV, and HCV VL measurements, show good analytical performance and a strong correlation between results. The study results suggest that the assays can be used interchangeably for long-term monitoring of chronic infections.
Letter to the Editor2022-03-01 Diagnostic Immunology
Sang-Hyon Kim , M.D., Ph.D., Ji-Hyun Lee , M.S., Hye-Jin Jeong , M.D., Ji-Min Kim , M.D., Ph.D., Won-Ki Baek , M.D., Ph.D., Tae-Hwan Kim , M.D., Ph.D., Jae-Bum Jun , M.D., Ph.D., and Chang-Nam Son , M.D., Ph.D.
Full Text
PDF
Pubmed
PMC
