Show
Important update: Healthcare facilities CDC has updated select ways to operate healthcare systems effectively in response to COVID-19 vaccination. Learn more
Interim Guidelines for COVID-19 Antibody Testing Interim Guidelines for COVID-19 Antibody Testing in Clinical and Public Health Settings
Healthcare providers considering antibody testing of persons with a history of possible COVID-19 or public health officials and other researchers conducting investigations involving antibody tests. Key Points:Serologic methods have public health value for monitoring and responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, and clinical utility in providing care for patients.
Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) initiates a cell-mediated and humoral immune response that produces antibodies against specific viral antigens such as the nucleocapsid (N) protein and spike (S) protein. These include anti-S protein antibodies that target the spike’s S1 protein subunit and receptor binding domain (RBD). Antibody tests can detect the presence of these antibodies in serum within days to weeks following acute infection. However, antibody testing should not be used to diagnose acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. Antibody tests can identify persons with resolving or past SARS-CoV-2 infection and thereby help scientists and public health experts better understand the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2. Although the immune correlates of protection are not fully understood, evidence indicates that antibody development following infection likely confers some degree of immunity from subsequent infection for at least 6 months (1, 2). However, it is not known to what extent SARS-CoV-2 variants could impact protection from subsequent infection (3). Development of Antibodies and ImmunityInfectionData indicate that nearly all immunocompetent persons develop an adaptive immune response following SARS-CoV-2 infection, triggering antiviral humoral and cellular immune responses via B and T cell-mediated immunity (4–6), respectively. Our understanding of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 is rapidly advancing. In humans, the humoral response includes antibodies directed against S and N proteins. The S protein contains two subunits, S1 and S2. The S1 subunit contains the RBD that mediates binding of virus to susceptible cells. RBD is the main target for neutralizing antibodies. Antibodies—including IgM, IgG, and IgA—against S and its subunits can be detected in serum within 1-3 weeks after infection (7, 8). IgM and IgG antibodies can arise nearly simultaneously (7); however, IgM (and IgA) antibodies decay more rapidly than IgG (7, 9). The clinical significance of measuring serum IgA in SARS-CoV-2 infection is not known; however secretory IgA plays an important role in protecting mucosal surfaces against pathogens by neutralizing respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2 (10). IgG antibodies, including IgG against the S and N proteins, persist for at least several months in most persons, but the precise duration of time that antibodies persist after infection is unknown (11). Loss of previously detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (seroreversion) has been reported among persons with mild disease (12). Persons with more severe disease appear to develop a more robust antibody response with IgM, IgG, and IgA, all achieving higher titers and exhibiting longer persistence (12, 13). The observed persistence of antibodies can vary by assay (14), and some studies have found that approximately 5%–10% of people do not develop detectable IgG antibodies following infection (15, 16). Although neutralizing antibodies might not be detected among patients with mild or asymptomatic disease (17), the humoral immune response appears to remain intact even with loss of specific antibodies over time because of the persistence of memory B-cells (18). SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies that inhibit viral replication in vitro mainly target the RBD (5, 6). Efforts to better understand antibody kinetics, longevity of humoral immune responses, correlation of binding antibody levels to neutralizing antibodies, and serological surrogates of immune protection are dependent on wider availability of quantitative binding antibody assays that are standardized and traceable to an international standard (19). SARS-CoV-2 reinfection has been documented (20, 21); however, studies indicate that persons with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are less likely to experience subsequent infection or clinical disease than persons without antibodies. Investigations of outbreaks among people on a fishing vessel and at a summer camp in the United States found that persons with pre-existing SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were correlated with protection from subsequent infection (22, 23). In sequential outbreaks among staff and residents of two British nursing homes, persons who tested antibody-positive following the first outbreak were approximately 96% less likely to become infected during the second outbreak four months later (24). In a British prospective cohort study of persons with and without SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, the adjusted incidence rate ratio for subsequent infection was 0.11 among persons followed for a median of 200 days after a positive antibody test, compared with those who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (2). Another British cohort study found an 84% reduction in SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence over a seven-month period among persons who had tested antibody positive for SARS-CoV-2 or had prior infection documented by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) (1). A large study in the United States of commercial laboratory results linked to medical claims data and electronic medical records found a 90% reduction in infection among persons with antibodies compared with persons without antibodies (25), and another study of U.S. military recruits found that seropositive persons had an 82% reduction in incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection over a 6-week period (26). Experiments on non-human primates support the above observations in humans. Experimentally infected rhesus macaques that developed humoral and cellular immune responses were protected against reinfection when re-challenged 35 days later (27). Another study found that transfer of purified IgG from rhesus macaques infected with SARS-CoV-2 was effective in protecting naïve rhesus macaques from infection, and the threshold titers for protection, based upon binding and neutralizing antibodies, were determined. Analyses of data from two vaccine trials found that higher titers of neutralizing and anti-S binding antibodies correlated with more effective protection from infection.(28, 29) Taken together, these findings in humans and non-human primates suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection and development of antibodies can result in some level of protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. The extent and duration of protection have yet to be determined. While life-long immunity has not been observed with endemic seasonal coronaviruses (30), studies of persons infected with the SARS-CoV-1 and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS-CoV) coronaviruses demonstrated measurable antibody for 18–24 months following infection (31, 32), and neutralizing antibody was present for 34 months in a small study of MERS-CoV-infected patients (33). It is not known to what extent persons re-infected with SARS-CoV-2 might transmit SARS-CoV-2 to others or whether the clinical spectrum differs from that of primary infection. VaccinationSARS-CoV-2 infection begins when the RBD of the S protein of the virus binds to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2) receptor site in human cells, the initial step in viral entry into human cells. Preventing SARS-CoV-2 from binding with ACE-2 receptors in the respiratory tract of humans can prevent infection and illness (34). This interaction between the S protein of SARS-CoV-2 and the ACE-2 receptor sites has been the major focus of vaccine development. The vaccine candidates that have received EUA or approval from FDA or are in late-stage development aim to elicit neutralizing antibodies against the S protein or the RBD (35). Data from two phase III mRNA vaccine efficacy trials and cohort studies demonstrated up to 95% efficacy following a two-dose vaccination series (36–38). It is unknown whether infection confers a similar degree of immunity compared to vaccination. SARS-CoV-2 infection results in antibody development against viral proteins including the N and S proteins. Vaccine-induced antibody development has implications for antibody testing. Before vaccine introduction, a SARS-CoV-2 antibody test that detects any of the N, S, or RBD antibodies could be considered to indicate previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2. A vaccinated person could test positive by serologic tests for the vaccine antigenic target (S and S subunits, including RBD) but not against other non-target proteins (39, 40). Thus, history of vaccination and/or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection must be considered when interpreting antibody test results. Currently available antibody tests for SARS-CoV-2 assess IgM and/or IgG to one of two viral proteins: S or N. Because COVID-19 vaccines are constructed to encode the spike protein or a portion of the spike protein, a positive test for S IgM and/or IgG could indicate prior infection and/or vaccination. To evaluate for evidence of prior infection in a person with a history of COVID-19 vaccination, a test that specifically evaluates anti-N IgM/IgG should be used. Testing for antibodies that indicate prior infection could be a useful public health tool as vaccination programs are implemented, provided the antibody tests are adequately validated to detect antibodies to specific proteins (or antigens). Although an antibody test can employ specific antigens, antibodies developed in response to different proteins might cross-react (i.e., the tests might detect antibodies they are not intended to detect), and therefore, might not provide sufficient information on the presence of antigen-specific antibodies. For antibody tests with FDA EUA, it has not been established whether the antigens employed by the test specifically detect only antibodies against those antigens and not other antigens. Although current EUA indications do not preclude the use of these tests in vaccinated individuals, none of the currently authorized tests have been specifically authorized to assess immunity or protection of persons who have received a COVID-19 vaccine. Considerations for public health and clinical practiceAccumulating evidence suggests that the presence of antibodies following infection offers some level of protection from reinfection. Evidence includes the following: (1) reduced incidence of infection among persons with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies followed for 3 months or longer; (2) findings from outbreak investigations that pre-existing detectable antibody correlates with reduced incidence of infection (22, 23, 26, 41); (3) challenge experiments in primates passively immunized with convalescent plasma demonstrating prevention of infection (42); (4) viral neutralization demonstrated with serum from persons following infection (5, 6); (5) data demonstrating that vaccination, which also results in antibody production, can reduce the incidence of illness (36, 37); and (6) decreased disease severity, and even prevention, of infection associated with administration of monoclonal antibodies (43, 44). While it remains uncertain to what degree and for how long persons with detectable antibodies are protected against reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 or what concentration of antibodies are needed to provide such protection, cohort studies indicate 80%–90% reduction in incidence for at least 6 months after infection among antibody-positive persons (1, 2, 25). Longitudinal patient follow-up studies are ongoing to measure antibody levels before and after vaccination or infection to identify an association between responses below a certain threshold and vaccine failure or reinfection. These longitudinal patient follow-up studies are expected to elucidate the relationship between antibodies and protection from reinfection. In addition, T-cell-mediated adaptive immunity following infection, although not fully understood, likely contributes to protection from subsequent exposure to SARS-CoV-2 (45). It is also not known whether, and to what extent, viral evolution and the emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants could impact immunity from reinfection. One study in the United Kingdom found that among people with primary infections >180 days prior to reinfection, the risk of reinfection with the Delta variant was increased compared to reinfection with the Alpha variant (46).
While S protein is essential for virus entry into cells and is present on the viral surface, N protein is the most abundantly expressed immunodominant protein. Multiple forms of S protein—full-length (S1+S2) or partial (S1 domain or RBD)—are used as antigens for antibody tests. The protein target determines cross-reactivity and specificity because N is more conserved across coronaviruses than S, and, within S, the RBD is more conserved than S1 or full-length S. The choice of antigenic targets might help address different aspects of immune response. Antibody detection against RBD is considered to have higher correlation toward functional aspects like ability to neutralize virus (6). Differential reactivity of S and N specific antibodies might be used to help differentiate previous infection from vaccination in serologic studies, particularly for vaccines that produce antibodies only against S protein (1, 25, 40). Types of antibody testingDifferent types of assays can be used to determine different aspects of the adaptive immune response and functionality of antibodies. The tests can be broadly classified to detect either binding or neutralizing antibodies.
Performance of antibody testsFDA requires commercially marketed antibody tests for SARS-CoV-2 to receive Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) or approval. Multiple agencies—including FDA, the National Cancer Institute/National Institutes of Health (NCI/NIH), CDC, and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA)—are collaborating with members of academia and the medical community to evaluate the performance of antibody tests independently using a well-characterized set of clinical specimens (serum and plasma) collected before and during the current COVID-19 pandemic. Independently evaluated test performance and the approval status of tests are listed on an FDA website. Only one test has received an EUA as a quantitative assay (providing a measured and scaled assessment of antibody levels). All other currently authorized tests are qualitative (providing a result that is positive, negative, or indeterminate) or semi-quantitative. The World Health Organization has developed international standards for SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests that can serve as the foundation for the calibration of tests that quantify antibodies. Both laboratory and point-of-care antibody tests have received EUA from the FDA. Antibody testing technologies include single-use lateral flow tests where the presence of antibody is demonstrated by a color change on a paper strip (similar to a pregnancy test) and laboratory-based immunoassays that allow for processing of many specimens at the same time. The EUA letter of authorization includes the settings in which the test is authorized, based on FDA’s determination of appropriate settings for use during the public health emergency.
Acute infection from SARS-CoV-2 is determined best by diagnostic testing using a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) or antigen test. Resolving or past infection is best determined by serologic testing that indicates the presence of anti-N antibody. Accumulating evidence suggests that infection with SARS-CoV-2 with subsequent development of antibodies could confer some level of immunity for at least 6 months. However, the robustness and durability of immunity following infection and how it compares with vaccine-induced immunity remain unknown. These recommendations will be updated as new information becomes available. Choice of antibody test and testing strategy
Indications for antibody testing and interpretation of results
Current vaccines distributed in the United States induce antibodies to S protein. Thus, the presence of antibodies to N protein indicates previous infection regardless of a person’s vaccination status, while presence of antibodies to S protein indicates either previous infection or vaccination. The presence of antibodies to S protein and absence of antibodies to N protein in the same specimen indicates vaccination in a person never infected or could signal prior infection in a person whose antibodies to N protein have waned. Since vaccines induce antibodies to specific viral protein targets, post-vaccination antibody test results will be negative in persons without a history of previous infection if the test used does not detect antibodies induced by the vaccine. Interpretation of anti-S and anti-N antibody results based on vaccination status
Vaccinated and previously infected
Vaccinated and previously infected
Vaccinated and not previously infected
Vaccinated and not previously infected
Not vaccinated and previously infected
Not vaccinated and previously infected
Not previously vaccinated or infected
Not previously vaccinated or infected If vaccination status unknown
Previously infected, may or may not have been vaccinated
Previously infected, may or may not have been vaccinated
Vaccinated with no previous infection
Vaccinated with no previous infection
Not previously vaccinated or infected
Not previously vaccinated or infected *Potential false positive or false negative results, failure to develop detectable antibodies after vaccination or infection, and waning of antibodies with time after infection or vaccination should be considered when interpreting antibody test results.
Additional considerations for use of antibody tests
All eligible people should be vaccinated, including unvaccinated people who have previously been infected and have detectable antibodies.
As of September 21, 2021
As of March 17, 2021
|