# Discrepancy in SARS-CoV-2 Infection Status Among PCR, Serological, and Cellular Immunity Assays of Nucleocapsids: A Historical Cohort Study

**Authors:** Taiga Uchiyama, Yurie Kobashi, Takeshi Kawamura, Yoshitaka Nishikawa, Aya Nakayama, Fumiya Oguro, Yudai Kaneko, Chika Yamamoto, Naomi Ito, Tianchen Zhao, Hiroaki Saito, Toshiki Abe, Tatsuhiko Kodama, Masaharu Tsubokura

PMC · DOI: 10.3390/vaccines13030259 · Vaccines · 2025-02-28

## TL;DR

This study found differences between PCR tests and immune response tests in identifying past SARS-CoV-2 infections, suggesting multiple tests are needed for accurate results.

## Contribution

The study reveals discrepancies between PCR and immune assays for SARS-CoV-2 infection status, emphasizing the need for combined testing.

## Key findings

- PCR-negative individuals showed varied IgG(N) positivity, indicating prior infection.
- IgG(S) levels were higher in IgG(N)-positive groups, suggesting stronger immune responses.
- PCR-positive individuals also showed IgG(N) discrepancies, highlighting test variability.

## Abstract

Background/Objectives: Limited research has compared tests assessing humoral and cellular immunity related to SARS-CoV-2 infection. This study evaluated immunoglobulin G for nucleocapsid (IgG(N)) and T-spot for nucleocapsid (T-spot(N)) assays against polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test results for identifying infected individuals. Methods: This study included participants who had completed five blood samplings since their second COVID-19 vaccination between 9 September 2021 and 6 November 2022. Chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) tests measured the humoral immune response, IgG(S) and neutralizing activity tests the immune status, and IgG(N) tests the infection history. For cellar immunity, T-spot(S) indicated immune status, and T-spot(N) indicated infection history. Results: The primary outcome was the proportion of individuals who tested positive for PCR and the proportion who tested positive for IgG(N) and T-spot(N). Overall, this study included 2104 participants. In the PCR-negative group, 1838 individuals tested negative for IgG(N), whereas 64 tested positive at least once. The geometric mean of IgG(S) at T5 was 1541.7 AU/mL in the IgG(N)-negative group and 3965.8 AU/mL in the IgG(N)-positive group, which was 2.6 times higher. In the PCR-positive group, 25 individuals tested negative for IgG(N), while 177 tested positive at least once. The geometric mean of IgG(S) at T5 was 2700.6 AU/mL in the IgG(N)-negative group and 5400.8 AU/mL in the IgG(N)-positive group, showing higher values in the IgG(N)-positive group. Conclusions: A discrepancy was noted between PCR test results and the IgG(N) and T-spot(N) determinations. Combining multiple assays is required to accurately identify the past-infected population.

## Linked entities

- **Diseases:** SARS-CoV-2 (MONDO:0100096), COVID-19 (MONDO:0100096)

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** COVID-19 (MESH:D000086382), infected (MESH:D007239)

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11945907/full.md

## Figures

2 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11945907/full.md

## References

25 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11945907/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11945907