We describe the results of testing health care workers, from a tertiary care hospital in Japan that had experienced a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak during the first peak of the pandemic, for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific antibody seroconversion. Using two chemiluminescent immunoassays and a confirmatory surrogate virus neutralization test, serological testing revealed that a surprising 42% of overlooked COVID-19 diagnoses (27/64 cases) occurred when case detection relied solely on SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT). Our results suggest that the NAAT-positive population is only the tip of the iceberg and the portion left undetected might potentially have led to silent transmissions and triggered the spread. A questionnaire-based risk assessment was further indicative of exposures to specific aerosol-generating procedures (i.e., noninvasive ventilation and airway suctioning) having mediated transmission and served as the origins of the outbreak. Our observations are supportive of a multitiered testing approach, including the use of serological diagnostics, in order to accomplish exhaustive case detection along the whole COVID-19 spectrum. IMPORTANCE We describe the results of testing frontline health care workers, from a hospital in Japan that had experienced a COVID-19 outbreak, for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. Antibody testing revealed that a surprising 42% of overlooked COVID-19 diagnoses occurred when case detection relied solely on PCR-based viral detection. COVID-19 clusters have been continuously striking the health care system around the globe. Our findings illustrate that such clusters are lined with hidden infections eluding detection with diagnostic PCR and that the cluster burden in total is more immense than actually recognized. The mainstays of diagnosing infectious diseases, including COVID-19, generally consist of two approaches, one aiming to detect molecular fragments of the invading pathogen and the other to measure immune responses of the host. Considering antibody testing as one trustworthy option to test our way through the pandemic can aid in the exhaustive case detection of COVID-19 patients with variable presentations.

Serological Testing Reveals the Hidden COVID-19 Burden among Health Care Workers Experiencing a SARS-CoV-2 Nosocomial Outbreak.

IntroductionImmunoassays targeting different SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies are employed for seroprevalence studies. The degree of variability between immunoassays targeting anti-nucleocapsid (anti-NP; the majority) vs the potentially neutralising anti-spike antibodies (including anti-receptor-binding domain; anti-RBD), particularly in mild or asymptomatic disease, remains unclear.AimsWe aimed to explore variability in anti-NP and anti-RBD antibody detectability following mild symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and analyse antibody response for correlation with symptomatology.MethodsA multicentre prospective cross-sectional study was undertaken (April-July 2020). Paired serum samples were tested for anti-NP and anti-RBD IgG antibodies and reactivity expressed as binding ratios (BR). Multivariate linear regression was performed analysing age, sex, time since onset, symptomatology, anti-NP and anti-RBD antibody BR.ResultsWe included 906 adults. Antibody results (793/906; 87.5%; 95% confidence interval: 85.2-89.6) and BR strongly correlated (ρ = 0.75). PCR-confirmed cases were more frequently identified by anti-RBD (129/130) than anti-NP (123/130). Anti-RBD testing identified 83 of 325 (25.5%) cases otherwise reported as negative for anti-NP. Anti-NP presence (+1.75/unit increase; p < 0.001), fever (≥ 38°C; +1.81; p < 0.001) or anosmia (+1.91; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with increased anti-RBD BR. Age (p = 0.85), sex (p = 0.28) and cough (p = 0.35) were not. When time since symptom onset was considered, we did not observe a significant change in anti-RBD BR (p = 0.95) but did note decreasing anti-NP BR (p < 0.001).ConclusionSARS-CoV-2 anti-RBD IgG showed significant correlation with anti-NP IgG for absolute seroconversion and BR. Higher BR were seen in symptomatic individuals, particularly those with fever. Inter-assay variability (12.5%) was evident and raises considerations for optimising seroprevalence testing strategies/studies. 

/pdf/variability-in-detection-of-sars-cov-2-specific-antibody-1uave48h.pdf

Variability in detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses following mild infection: a prospective multicentre cross-sectional study, London, United Kingdom, 17 April to 17 July 2020

Background and objectives Seroprevalence estimation of COVID-19 is quite necessary for controlling the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Seroprevalence rate in recovered COVID-19 patients help us to identify individual with anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and its protective nature. The objective of present study was to evaluate seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among potential convalescent plasma donors and analysis of their deferral reasons. Materials and methods A total 400 potential convalescent plasma donors were enrolled over five-month period for this prospective study. Inclusion criteria were lab confirmed COVID-19 recovered patients and 14 days of symptoms free period. All prospective plasmapheresis donors were tested for IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibody through chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay, CBC, serum protein, blood grouping along with other required test for normal blood donation as per Drugs & Cosmetics Act. After pre donation testing and medical examination if donor was found to be ineligible for plasmapheresis was deferred. Seroprevalence rate was calculated by positive IgG antibody test results among the potential plasma donors. Results Seroprevalence rate was 87% for IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in prospective convalescent plasma donors (recovered COVID-19 patients). There was no significant difference in seroprevalence rate between different sub-groups with respect to gender, age, blood groups, Rh factor, mode of treatment, day of Ab testing and repeat plasma donation. Most common reason for their deferral was absent IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (13%) followed by absenteeism of eligible screen donors (6.7%), low Hb (1.7%) and poor veins for plasmapheresis (1.7%). Till five-month study period none of the plasmapheresis develop symptoms of reinfection with COVID-19. Conclusion In all, 13% recovered patients did not develop IgG antibodies after SARS-CoV-2 infection. SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies persist for quite some time and are protective against reinfection. More long-term serology studies are needed to understand better antibody response kinetics and duration of persistence of IgG antibodies.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among potential convalescent plasma donors and analysis of their deferral pattern: Experience from tertiary care hospital in western India.

Seroprevalence estimation of COVID-19 is quite necessary for controlling the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Seroprevalence rate in recovered COVID-19 patients help us to identify individual with anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and its protective nature. The objective of present study was to evaluate seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among potential convalescent plasma donors and analysis of their deferral reasons.A total 400 potential convalescent plasma donors were enrolled over five-month period for this prospective study. Inclusion criteria were lab confirmed COVID-19 recovered patients and 14 days of symptoms free period. All prospective plasmapheresis donors were tested for IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibody through chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay, CBC, serum protein, blood grouping along with other required test for normal blood donation as per Drugs & Cosmetics Act. After pre donation testing and medical examination if donor was found to be ineligible for plasmapheresis was deferred. Seroprevalence rate was calculated by positive IgG antibody test results among the potential plasma donors.Seroprevalence rate was 87% for IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in prospective convalescent plasma donors (recovered COVID-19 patients). There was no significant difference in seroprevalence rate between different sub-groups with respect to gender, age, blood groups, Rh factor, mode of treatment, day of Ab testing and repeat plasma donation. Most common reason for their deferral was absent IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (13%) followed by absenteeism of eligible screen donors (6.7%), low Hb (1.7%) and poor veins for plasmapheresis (1.7%). Till five-month study period none of the plasmapheresis develop symptoms of reinfection with COVID-19.In all, 13% recovered patients did not develop IgG antibodies after SARS-CoV-2 infection. SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies persist for quite some time and are protective against reinfection. More long-term serology studies are needed to understand better antibody response kinetics and duration of persistence of IgG antibodies. 

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among potential convalescent plasma donors and analysis of their deferral pattern: Experience from tertiary care hospital in western India

We describe the results of testing healthcare workers from a tertiary care hospital in Japan, which had experienced a COVID-19 outbreak during the first peak of the pandemic, for SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody seroconversion. Using two chemiluminescent immunoassays and a confirmatory surrogate virus neutralization test, serological testing unveiled that a surprising 42.2% (27/64) of overlooked COVID-19 diagnoses had occurred when case detection had relied solely on SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification testing. This undetected portion of the COVID-19 iceberg beneath the surface may potentially have led to silent transmissions and triggered the spread. A questionnaire-based risk assessment was further indicative of exposures to specific aerosol-generating procedures, i.e. non-invasive ventilation, having had conveyed the highest transmission risks and served as the origin of outbreak. Our observations are supportive of a multi-tiered testing approach, including the use of serological diagnostics, in order to accomplish exhaustive case detection along the whole COVID-19 spectrum.

/pdf/serological-testing-reveals-the-hidden-covid-19-burden-among-4asnubqp35.pdf

Serological testing reveals the hidden COVID-19 burden among healthcare workers experiencing a SARS-CoV-2 nosocomial outbreak.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has become a global pandemic. Case identification is currently made by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) during the acute phase and largely restricted to healthcare laboratories. Serological assays are emerging but independent validation is urgently required to assess their utility. We evaluated five different point-of-care (POC) SARS-CoV-2 antibody test kits against PCR, finding concordance across the assays (n = 15). We subsequently tested 200 patients using the OrientGene COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Cassette and find a sensitivity of 74% in the early infection period (day 5-9 post symptom onset), with 100% sensitivity not seen until day 13, demonstrating inferiority to PCR testing in the infectious period. Negative rate was 96%, but in validating the serological tests uncovered potential false-negatives from PCR testing late-presenting cases. A positive predictive value (PPV) of 37% in the general population precludes any use for general screening. Where a case definition is applied however, the PPV is substantially improved (95.4%), supporting use of serology testing in carefully targeted, high-risk populations. Larger studies in specific patient cohorts, including those with mild infection are urgently required to inform on the applicability of POC serological assays to help control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and improve case finding of patients that may experience late complications.

/pdf/point-of-care-sars-cov-2-serological-assays-for-enhanced-29ug3nqyb2.pdf

S. J. Denny

Papers

Point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 serological assays for enhanced case finding in a UK inpatient population.