Why the study?
Antibody avidity is important to evaluate immune responses, but a lack of standardization between different modified ELISA assays creates substantial variation and hampers comparison of results.
Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Variation from nonstandardized avidity assays limits cross-study comparability; leaves open need for validated protocols before broader use.
Antibody avidity is an important parameter to evaluate immune response, being useful to evaluate vaccine responses and helping to distinguish acute and latent infection. The antibody avidity can be measured by different methods, yet the most common is a modified ELISA. The utilization of commercial kits or in-house methods to evaluate antibody avidity have been adopted more and more, although the lack of standardization between different assays may generate a lot of variation in the process, making it hard to compare the results generated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Correa et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: