Frequency of Serological Non-responders and False-negative RT-PCR Results in SARS-CoV-2 Testing: a Population-based Study
Overview
Pathology
Authors
Affiliations
Objectives The sensitivity of molecular and serological methods for COVID-19 testing in an epidemiological setting is not well described. The aim of the study was to determine the frequency of negative RT-PCR results at first clinical presentation as well as negative serological results after a follow-up of at least 3 weeks. Methods Among all patients seen for suspected COVID-19 in Liechtenstein (n=1921), we included initially RT-PCR positive index patients (n=85) as well as initially RT-PCR negative (n=66) for follow-up with SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. Antibodies were detected with seven different commercially available immunoassays. Frequencies of negative RT-PCR and serology results in individuals with COVID-19 were determined and compared to those observed in a validation cohort of Swiss patients (n=211). Results Among COVID-19 patients in Liechtenstein, false-negative RT-PCR at initial presentation was seen in 18% (12/66), whereas negative serology in COVID-19 patients was 4% (3/85). The validation cohort showed similar frequencies: 2/66 (3%) for negative serology, and 16/155 (10%) for false negative RT-PCR. COVID-19 patients with negative follow-up serology tended to have a longer disease duration (p=0.05) and more clinical symptoms than other patients with COVID-19 (p<0.05). The antibody titer from quantitative immunoassays was positively associated with the number of disease symptoms and disease duration (p<0.001). Conclusions RT-PCR at initial presentation in patients with suspected COVID-19 can miss infected patients. Antibody titers of SARS-CoV-2 assays are linked to the number of disease symptoms and the duration of disease. One in 25 patients with RT-PCR-positive COVID-19 does not develop antibodies detectable with frequently employed and commercially available immunoassays.
Lester S, Stumpf M, Freeman B, Mills L, Schiffer J, Semenova V Access Microbiol. 2024; 6(2).
PMID: 38482357 PMC: 10928395. DOI: 10.1099/acmi.0.000463.v4.
Model based on COVID-19 evidence to predict and improve pandemic control.
Gonzalez R, Moya P, Bringa E, Bacigalupe G, Ramirez-Santana M, Kiwi M PLoS One. 2023; 18(6):e0286747.
PMID: 37319168 PMC: 10270358. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0286747.
Alibolandi Z, Ostadian A, Sayyah S, Haddad Kashani H, Ehteram H, Banafshe H Clin Mol Allergy. 2022; 20(1):15.
PMID: 36550478 PMC: 9774079. DOI: 10.1186/s12948-022-00180-1.
Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2.
Fox T, Geppert J, Dinnes J, Scandrett K, Bigio J, Sulis G Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022; 11():CD013652.
PMID: 36394900 PMC: 9671206. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013652.pub2.
Gorji H, Lunati I, Rudolf F, Vidondo B, Hardt W, Jenny P Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):19538.
PMID: 36376420 PMC: 9663184. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-23986-0.