Dried blood spot improves global access to aquaporin-4-IgG testing for neuromyelitis optica.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of dried blood spot (DBS) compared with conventional serum Aquaporin-4-IgG (AQP4-IgG) testing. METHODS: Prospective multicenter diagnostic study was conducted between April 2018 and October 2023 across medical centers in the United States, Uganda, and the Republic of Guinea. Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) patients and controls collected blood on filter paper cards along with concurrent serum samples. These samples underwent analysis using flow cytometric live-cell-based assays (CBA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to determine AQP4 serostatus. The accuracy of AQP4-IgG detection between DBS and serum (gold standard) was compared. RESULTS: Among 150 participants (47 cases, 103 controls), there was a strong correlation between DBS and serum samples (Spearman's correlation coefficient of 0.82). The AUC was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92-0.99). AQP4-IgG detection through DBS showed 87.0% sensitivity (95% CI: 0.74-0.95) and 100% specificity (95% CI: 0.96-1.00) using CBA, and 65.2% sensitivity (95% CI: 0.43-0.84) and 95.2% specificity (95% CI: 0.76-0.99) using ELISA. Serum ELISA demonstrated 69.6% sensitivity (95% CI: 0.47-0.87) and 98.4% specificity (95% CI: 0.91-0.99). The stability of DBS in detecting AQP4-IgG persisted over 24 months for most cases. INTERPRETATION: The DBS represents a viable alternative for detecting AQP4-IgG in resource-limited settings to diagnose NMOSD, offering high sensitivity and specificity comparable to serum testing. Moreover, DBS has low shipping costs, is easy to administer, and is suitable for point-of-care testing.

Limited Correlation between SARS-CoV-2 Serologic Assays for Identification of High-Titer COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Using FDA Thresholds.

In August 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) specified 12 authorized serologic assays and associated assay-specific cutoff values for the selection of high-titer CCP for use in hospitalized patients. The criteria used for establishing these cutoff values remains unclear. Here, we compare the overall agreement and concordance of five serologic assays included in the August 2020 FDA EUA at both the manufacturer-recommended qualitative cutoff thresholds and at the FDA-indicated thresholds for high-titer CCP, using serum samples collected as part of the CCP Expanded Access Program (EAP). The qualitative positive percent agreement (PPA) across assays ranged from 92.3% to 98.8%. However, the high-titer categorization across assays varied significantly, with the PPA ranging from 26.5% to 82.7%. The Roche anti-NC ECLIA provided the lowest agreement compared to all other assays. Efforts to optimize high-titer cutoffs could reduce, although not eliminate, the discordance across assays. The consequences of using nonstandardized assays are apparent in our study, and the high-titer cutoffs chosen for each assay are not directly comparable to each other. The generalized findings in our study will be relevant to any future use of convalescent plasma for either COVID-19 or future pandemics of newly emerged pathogens. IMPORTANCE COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) was one of the first therapeutic options available for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infections and continues to be used selectively for immunosuppressed patients. Given the emergence of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants which are resistant to treatment with available monoclonal antibody (MAb) therapy, CCP remains an important therapeutic consideration. The FDA has released several emergency use authorizations (EUA) that have specified which serological assays can be used for qualification of CCP, as well as assay-specific cutoffs that must be used to identify high-titer CCP. In this study, a cohort of donor CCP was assessed across multiple serological assays which received FDA EUA for qualification of CCP. This study indicates a high degree of discordance across the assays used to qualify CCP for clinical use, which may have precluded the optimal use of CCP, including during clinical trials. This study highlights the need for assay standardization early in the development of serological assays for emerging pathogens.

SARS-CoV-2 Serologic Assays Dependent on Dual-Antigen Binding Demonstrate Diverging Kinetics Relative to Other Antibody Detection Methods.

Longitudinal studies assessing durability of the anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (anti-SARS-CoV-2) humoral immune response have generated conflicting results. This has been proposed to be due to differences in patient populations, the lack of standardized methodologies, and the use of assays that measure distinct aspects of the humoral response. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were serially measured in sera from a cohort of 44 well-characterized convalescent plasma donors over 120 days post-COVID-19 symptom onset, utilizing eight assays, which varied according to antigen source, the detected antibody isotype, and the activity measured (i.e., binding, blocking, or neutralizing). While the majority of assays demonstrated a gradual decline in antibody titers over the course of 120 days, the two electrochemiluminescence immunoassay Roche assays (Roche Diagnostics Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 [qualitative, nucleocapsid based] and Roche Diagnostics Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S [semiquantitative, spike based]), which utilize dual-antigen binding for antibody detection, demonstrated stable and/or increasing antibody titers over the study period. This study is among the first to assess longitudinal, rather than cross-sectional, SARS-CoV-2 antibody profiles among convalescent COVID-19 patients, primarily using commercially available serologic assays with Food and Drug Administration emergency use authorization. We show that SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection is dependent on the serologic method used, which has implications for future assay utilization and clinical value.