The "false-positive" conundrum: IgA reference level overestimates the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2

On 12 June 2020, Brazil reached the second position worldwide in the number of COVID-19 cases. Authorities increased the number of tests performed, including the identification of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 (IgG, IgA, and IgM). There was an overflooding of the market with several tests, and the presen...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of global health 2021-01, Vol.11, p.05001-05001, Article 05001
Hauptverfasser: Caramelli, Bruno, Escalante-Rojas, Maria C, Chauhan, Hiteshi K C, Siciliano, Rinaldo F, Bittencourt, Marcio S, Micelli, Antonio C
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 05001
container_issue
container_start_page 05001
container_title Journal of global health
container_volume 11
creator Caramelli, Bruno
Escalante-Rojas, Maria C
Chauhan, Hiteshi K C
Siciliano, Rinaldo F
Bittencourt, Marcio S
Micelli, Antonio C
description On 12 June 2020, Brazil reached the second position worldwide in the number of COVID-19 cases. Authorities increased the number of tests performed, including the identification of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 (IgG, IgA, and IgM). There was an overflooding of the market with several tests, and the presence of possible false-positive results became a challenge. The purpose of this study was to describe the seroprevalence and immunoglobulin blood levels in a group of asymptomatic individuals using the reference levels provided by the manufacturer. Levels of IgG and IgA antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 were determined in blood serum by the same ELISA (enzyme-linked immunoassay) test. Patients must be free of symptoms. From 20 to 22 May 2020, 938 individuals were tested. There were 441 (47%) men, age 53 years (interquartile range (IQR) = 39-63.2). The sample included 335 (35.7%) subjects aged ≥60 years old. Subjects with a positive test were 54 (5.8%) for IgG and 96 (10.2%) for IgA and 42 (4.5%) for both IgG and IgA. The prevalence of IgG and IgA positive test was not different in men and women and not different in individuals under 60 and over 60 years of age. Conversely, analysing only individuals with positive tests, the levels of IgG in positive subjects were significantly higher than those with an IgA positive test, 3.00 (IQR = 1.68-5.65), and 1.95 (IQR = 1.40-3.38), respectively;  = 0.017. Additionally, individuals with isolated IgA positive tests had significantly lower levels of IgA than those with both IgA and IgG positive tests: 1.95 (IQR = 1.60-2.40) and 3.15 (IQR = 2.20-3.90), respectively,  = 0.005. These latter data suggest that IgA shows a deviation of the distribution to the left in comparison to IgG distribution data. Indeed, many subjects reported as IgA positive had immunoglobulin levels slightly elevated. In conclusion, we strongly suggest caution in the interpretation of IgA test results. This recommendation is more important for those with positive IgA just above the reference level.
doi_str_mv 10.7189/jogh.11.05001
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7882210</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2491940933</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-f50f084d3328d2f30a1442f81c8c05deb498a720bef96cbc04853cc27949e6233</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkd1L5DAUxYO4rOL6uK8SfPKl483HtMk-CMPgFwgLq7uvIU1vZyqdppu0Bf97M6MOmpfkkh_nnOQQ8pPBrGBKXz771XrG2AzmAOyAHHOQRca1yg_350IdkdMYnyGtggmu8u_kSIgcJAh-TPqnNdLz2rYRs97HZmgmPKfOd2NXhXHzi96vFjRgjQE7h7TFCVvqpzTGodnYASMdkkLE4PuAk213mK-p7Yam9FWzBTx9XPx5zJb-X8Z_kG87t9P3_YT8vbl-Wt5lD79v75eLh8wJVQxZPYcalKxESlzxWoBlUvJaMacczCsspVa24FBirXNXOpBqLpzjhZYacy7ECbl60-3HcoOVw24ItjV9SKnDi_G2MV9vumZtVn4yhVKcM0gCF-8Cwf8f03PNpokO29Z26MdouNRMS9Bi65W9oS74GNNv7W0YmG1RZluUYczsikr82edse_qjFvEKBHWP_A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2491940933</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The "false-positive" conundrum: IgA reference level overestimates the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><creator>Caramelli, Bruno ; Escalante-Rojas, Maria C ; Chauhan, Hiteshi K C ; Siciliano, Rinaldo F ; Bittencourt, Marcio S ; Micelli, Antonio C</creator><creatorcontrib>Caramelli, Bruno ; Escalante-Rojas, Maria C ; Chauhan, Hiteshi K C ; Siciliano, Rinaldo F ; Bittencourt, Marcio S ; Micelli, Antonio C</creatorcontrib><description>On 12 June 2020, Brazil reached the second position worldwide in the number of COVID-19 cases. Authorities increased the number of tests performed, including the identification of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 (IgG, IgA, and IgM). There was an overflooding of the market with several tests, and the presence of possible false-positive results became a challenge. The purpose of this study was to describe the seroprevalence and immunoglobulin blood levels in a group of asymptomatic individuals using the reference levels provided by the manufacturer. Levels of IgG and IgA antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 were determined in blood serum by the same ELISA (enzyme-linked immunoassay) test. Patients must be free of symptoms. From 20 to 22 May 2020, 938 individuals were tested. There were 441 (47%) men, age 53 years (interquartile range (IQR) = 39-63.2). The sample included 335 (35.7%) subjects aged ≥60 years old. Subjects with a positive test were 54 (5.8%) for IgG and 96 (10.2%) for IgA and 42 (4.5%) for both IgG and IgA. The prevalence of IgG and IgA positive test was not different in men and women and not different in individuals under 60 and over 60 years of age. Conversely, analysing only individuals with positive tests, the levels of IgG in positive subjects were significantly higher than those with an IgA positive test, 3.00 (IQR = 1.68-5.65), and 1.95 (IQR = 1.40-3.38), respectively;  = 0.017. Additionally, individuals with isolated IgA positive tests had significantly lower levels of IgA than those with both IgA and IgG positive tests: 1.95 (IQR = 1.60-2.40) and 3.15 (IQR = 2.20-3.90), respectively,  = 0.005. These latter data suggest that IgA shows a deviation of the distribution to the left in comparison to IgG distribution data. Indeed, many subjects reported as IgA positive had immunoglobulin levels slightly elevated. In conclusion, we strongly suggest caution in the interpretation of IgA test results. This recommendation is more important for those with positive IgA just above the reference level.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2047-2978</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2047-2986</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.7189/jogh.11.05001</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33604032</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Scotland: International Society of Global Health</publisher><subject>Adult ; Antibodies, Viral - blood ; Brazil - epidemiology ; COVID-19 - diagnosis ; COVID-19 - epidemiology ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; False Positive Reactions ; Female ; Humans ; Immunoglobulin A - blood ; Immunoglobulin G - blood ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Reference Values ; Research Theme 1: COVID-19 Pandemic ; SARS-CoV-2 - immunology ; Seroepidemiologic Studies</subject><ispartof>Journal of global health, 2021-01, Vol.11, p.05001-05001, Article 05001</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2021 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved. 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-f50f084d3328d2f30a1442f81c8c05deb498a720bef96cbc04853cc27949e6233</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-f50f084d3328d2f30a1442f81c8c05deb498a720bef96cbc04853cc27949e6233</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7882210/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7882210/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33604032$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Caramelli, Bruno</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Escalante-Rojas, Maria C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chauhan, Hiteshi K C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siciliano, Rinaldo F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bittencourt, Marcio S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Micelli, Antonio C</creatorcontrib><title>The "false-positive" conundrum: IgA reference level overestimates the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2</title><title>Journal of global health</title><addtitle>J Glob Health</addtitle><description>On 12 June 2020, Brazil reached the second position worldwide in the number of COVID-19 cases. Authorities increased the number of tests performed, including the identification of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 (IgG, IgA, and IgM). There was an overflooding of the market with several tests, and the presence of possible false-positive results became a challenge. The purpose of this study was to describe the seroprevalence and immunoglobulin blood levels in a group of asymptomatic individuals using the reference levels provided by the manufacturer. Levels of IgG and IgA antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 were determined in blood serum by the same ELISA (enzyme-linked immunoassay) test. Patients must be free of symptoms. From 20 to 22 May 2020, 938 individuals were tested. There were 441 (47%) men, age 53 years (interquartile range (IQR) = 39-63.2). The sample included 335 (35.7%) subjects aged ≥60 years old. Subjects with a positive test were 54 (5.8%) for IgG and 96 (10.2%) for IgA and 42 (4.5%) for both IgG and IgA. The prevalence of IgG and IgA positive test was not different in men and women and not different in individuals under 60 and over 60 years of age. Conversely, analysing only individuals with positive tests, the levels of IgG in positive subjects were significantly higher than those with an IgA positive test, 3.00 (IQR = 1.68-5.65), and 1.95 (IQR = 1.40-3.38), respectively;  = 0.017. Additionally, individuals with isolated IgA positive tests had significantly lower levels of IgA than those with both IgA and IgG positive tests: 1.95 (IQR = 1.60-2.40) and 3.15 (IQR = 2.20-3.90), respectively,  = 0.005. These latter data suggest that IgA shows a deviation of the distribution to the left in comparison to IgG distribution data. Indeed, many subjects reported as IgA positive had immunoglobulin levels slightly elevated. In conclusion, we strongly suggest caution in the interpretation of IgA test results. This recommendation is more important for those with positive IgA just above the reference level.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Antibodies, Viral - blood</subject><subject>Brazil - epidemiology</subject><subject>COVID-19 - diagnosis</subject><subject>COVID-19 - epidemiology</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>False Positive Reactions</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immunoglobulin A - blood</subject><subject>Immunoglobulin G - blood</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Reference Values</subject><subject>Research Theme 1: COVID-19 Pandemic</subject><subject>SARS-CoV-2 - immunology</subject><subject>Seroepidemiologic Studies</subject><issn>2047-2978</issn><issn>2047-2986</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkd1L5DAUxYO4rOL6uK8SfPKl483HtMk-CMPgFwgLq7uvIU1vZyqdppu0Bf97M6MOmpfkkh_nnOQQ8pPBrGBKXz771XrG2AzmAOyAHHOQRca1yg_350IdkdMYnyGtggmu8u_kSIgcJAh-TPqnNdLz2rYRs97HZmgmPKfOd2NXhXHzi96vFjRgjQE7h7TFCVvqpzTGodnYASMdkkLE4PuAk213mK-p7Yam9FWzBTx9XPx5zJb-X8Z_kG87t9P3_YT8vbl-Wt5lD79v75eLh8wJVQxZPYcalKxESlzxWoBlUvJaMacczCsspVa24FBirXNXOpBqLpzjhZYacy7ECbl60-3HcoOVw24ItjV9SKnDi_G2MV9vumZtVn4yhVKcM0gCF-8Cwf8f03PNpokO29Z26MdouNRMS9Bi65W9oS74GNNv7W0YmG1RZluUYczsikr82edse_qjFvEKBHWP_A</recordid><startdate>20210116</startdate><enddate>20210116</enddate><creator>Caramelli, Bruno</creator><creator>Escalante-Rojas, Maria C</creator><creator>Chauhan, Hiteshi K C</creator><creator>Siciliano, Rinaldo F</creator><creator>Bittencourt, Marcio S</creator><creator>Micelli, Antonio C</creator><general>International Society of Global Health</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210116</creationdate><title>The "false-positive" conundrum: IgA reference level overestimates the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2</title><author>Caramelli, Bruno ; Escalante-Rojas, Maria C ; Chauhan, Hiteshi K C ; Siciliano, Rinaldo F ; Bittencourt, Marcio S ; Micelli, Antonio C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-f50f084d3328d2f30a1442f81c8c05deb498a720bef96cbc04853cc27949e6233</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Antibodies, Viral - blood</topic><topic>Brazil - epidemiology</topic><topic>COVID-19 - diagnosis</topic><topic>COVID-19 - epidemiology</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>False Positive Reactions</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immunoglobulin A - blood</topic><topic>Immunoglobulin G - blood</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Reference Values</topic><topic>Research Theme 1: COVID-19 Pandemic</topic><topic>SARS-CoV-2 - immunology</topic><topic>Seroepidemiologic Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Caramelli, Bruno</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Escalante-Rojas, Maria C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chauhan, Hiteshi K C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siciliano, Rinaldo F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bittencourt, Marcio S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Micelli, Antonio C</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of global health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Caramelli, Bruno</au><au>Escalante-Rojas, Maria C</au><au>Chauhan, Hiteshi K C</au><au>Siciliano, Rinaldo F</au><au>Bittencourt, Marcio S</au><au>Micelli, Antonio C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The "false-positive" conundrum: IgA reference level overestimates the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2</atitle><jtitle>Journal of global health</jtitle><addtitle>J Glob Health</addtitle><date>2021-01-16</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>11</volume><spage>05001</spage><epage>05001</epage><pages>05001-05001</pages><artnum>05001</artnum><issn>2047-2978</issn><eissn>2047-2986</eissn><abstract>On 12 June 2020, Brazil reached the second position worldwide in the number of COVID-19 cases. Authorities increased the number of tests performed, including the identification of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 (IgG, IgA, and IgM). There was an overflooding of the market with several tests, and the presence of possible false-positive results became a challenge. The purpose of this study was to describe the seroprevalence and immunoglobulin blood levels in a group of asymptomatic individuals using the reference levels provided by the manufacturer. Levels of IgG and IgA antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 were determined in blood serum by the same ELISA (enzyme-linked immunoassay) test. Patients must be free of symptoms. From 20 to 22 May 2020, 938 individuals were tested. There were 441 (47%) men, age 53 years (interquartile range (IQR) = 39-63.2). The sample included 335 (35.7%) subjects aged ≥60 years old. Subjects with a positive test were 54 (5.8%) for IgG and 96 (10.2%) for IgA and 42 (4.5%) for both IgG and IgA. The prevalence of IgG and IgA positive test was not different in men and women and not different in individuals under 60 and over 60 years of age. Conversely, analysing only individuals with positive tests, the levels of IgG in positive subjects were significantly higher than those with an IgA positive test, 3.00 (IQR = 1.68-5.65), and 1.95 (IQR = 1.40-3.38), respectively;  = 0.017. Additionally, individuals with isolated IgA positive tests had significantly lower levels of IgA than those with both IgA and IgG positive tests: 1.95 (IQR = 1.60-2.40) and 3.15 (IQR = 2.20-3.90), respectively,  = 0.005. These latter data suggest that IgA shows a deviation of the distribution to the left in comparison to IgG distribution data. Indeed, many subjects reported as IgA positive had immunoglobulin levels slightly elevated. In conclusion, we strongly suggest caution in the interpretation of IgA test results. This recommendation is more important for those with positive IgA just above the reference level.</abstract><cop>Scotland</cop><pub>International Society of Global Health</pub><pmid>33604032</pmid><doi>10.7189/jogh.11.05001</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2047-2978
ispartof Journal of global health, 2021-01, Vol.11, p.05001-05001, Article 05001
issn 2047-2978
2047-2986
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7882210
source MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; PubMed Central Open Access
subjects Adult
Antibodies, Viral - blood
Brazil - epidemiology
COVID-19 - diagnosis
COVID-19 - epidemiology
Cross-Sectional Studies
False Positive Reactions
Female
Humans
Immunoglobulin A - blood
Immunoglobulin G - blood
Male
Middle Aged
Reference Values
Research Theme 1: COVID-19 Pandemic
SARS-CoV-2 - immunology
Seroepidemiologic Studies
title The "false-positive" conundrum: IgA reference level overestimates the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T17%3A53%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20%22false-positive%22%20conundrum:%20IgA%20reference%20level%20overestimates%20the%20seroprevalence%20of%20antibodies%20to%20SARS-CoV-2&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20global%20health&rft.au=Caramelli,%20Bruno&rft.date=2021-01-16&rft.volume=11&rft.spage=05001&rft.epage=05001&rft.pages=05001-05001&rft.artnum=05001&rft.issn=2047-2978&rft.eissn=2047-2986&rft_id=info:doi/10.7189/jogh.11.05001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2491940933%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2491940933&rft_id=info:pmid/33604032&rfr_iscdi=true