Development and validation of different indirect ELISAs for MERS-CoV serological testing

Hashem, Anwar M.; Al-amri, Sawsan S.; Al-subhi, Tagreed L.; Siddiq, Loai A.; Hassan, Ahmed M.; Alawi, Maha M.; Alhabbab, Rowa Y.; Hindawi, Salwa I.; Mohammed, Osama B.; Amor, Nabil S.; Alagaili, Abdulaziz N.; Mirza, Ahmed A.; Azhar, Esam I.

Since 2012, MERS-CoV has caused up to 2220 cases and 790 deaths in 27 countries with Saudi Arabia being the most affected country with ~83.1% of the cases and ~38.8% local death rate. Current serological assays such as microneutralization (MN), plaque reduction neutralization, immunofluorescence, protein microarray or pseudoparticle neutralization assays rely on handling of live MERS-CoV in high containment laboratories or need for expensive and special equipment and reagents and highly trained personnel which represent a technical hurdle for most laboratories in resource-limited MERS-CoV endemic countries. Here, we developed, compared and evaluated three different indirect ELISAs based on MERS-CoV nucleocapsid protein (N), spike (S) ectodomain (amino acids 1–1297) and S1 subunit (amino acids 1–725) and compared them with MN assay. The developed ELISAs were evaluated using large number of confirmed seropositive (79 samples) and seronegative (274 samples) MERS-CoV human serum samples. Both rS1- and rS-ELISAs maintained high sensitivity and specificity (≥90%) across a wider range of OD values compared to rN-ELISA. Moreover, rS1- and rS-based ELISAs showed better agreement and correlation with MN assay in contrast to rN-ELISA. Collectively, our data demonstrate that rS1-ELISA and rS-ELISA are more reliable than rN-ELISA and represent a suitable choice for seroepidemiological testing and surveillance in MERS-CoV endemic regions.