ABSTRACT
IntroductionSerological testing can augment delayed case identification programmes for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronoravirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Immunoassays employ anti-nucleocapsid (anti-NP;the majority) or potentially neutralising anti-spike (including anti-receptor binding domain;anti-RBD) antibody targets, yet correlation between assays and variability arising from disease symptomatology remains unclear. We explore these possibly differential immune responses across the disease spectrum.MethodsA multicentre prospective study was undertaken via a SARS-CoV-2 delayed case identification programme (08 May-11 July 2020). Matched samples were tested for anti-NP and anti-RBD (utilising an ‘inhouse’ double-antigen bridged assay), reactivity expressed as test/cut-off binding ratios (BR) and results compared. A multivariate linear regression model analysed age, sex, symptomatology, PCR positivity, anti-NP, and anti-RBD BRs. Participants were followed up for possible reinfection.Results902 individuals underwent matched testing;109 were SARS-CoV-2 PCR swab positive. Anti-NP, anti-RBD immunoassay agreement was 87.5% (95% CI 85.3–89.6), with BRs strongly correlated (R=0.75). PCR confirmed cases were more frequently identified by anti-RBD (sensitivity 108/109, 99.1%, 95% CI 95.0–100.0) than anti-NP (102/109, 93.6%, 95% CI 87.2–97.4). Anti-RBD identified an additional 83/325 (25.5%) cases in those seronegative for anti-NP. Presence of anti-NP (p<0.0001), fever (p=0.005), or anosmia (p=0.002) were all significantly associated with an increased anti-RBD BR. Age was associated with reduced anti-RBD BR (p=0.052). Three cases with evidence of seroconversion (anti-RBD seropositive) presented with subsequent reactive PCR results, two of which coincided with first time onset of Public Heath England SARS-CoV-2 symptoms.ConclusionsSARS-CoV-2 anti-RBD shows significant correlation with anti-NP for absolute seroconversion, and BRs. Higher BRs are seen in symptomatic individuals with significantly higher levels seen in those with fever and anosmia. The degree of discordant results (12.5%) limits the use of anti-NP as a stand-alone for delayed case finding programmes. Similarly, this discordance limits the utility of non-neutralising anti-NP assays in place of potentially neutralising anti-RBD to infer possible immunity.** this abstract presentation was awarded an Honourable Mention
ABSTRACT
ImportancePopulation-wide serological testing is an essential component in understanding the COVID-19 pandemic. The logistical challenges of undertaking widespread serological testing could be eased through use of a reliable dried blood spot (DBS) sampling method. ObjectiveTo validate the use of dried blood spot sampling for the detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. Design, setting and participantsEighty-seven matched DBS and serum samples were obtained from eighty individuals, including thirty-one who were previously PCR-positive for SARS-CoV-2. DBS eluates and sera were used in an ELISA to detect antibodies to the viral spike protein. ResultsSpecific anti-SARS-Cov-2 spike glycoprotein antibodies were detectable in both serum and DBS eluate and there was a significant correlation between the antibody levels detected in matched samples (r = 0.96, p<0.0001). Using serum as the gold standard in the assay, matched DBS samples achieved a Cohens kappa coefficient of 0.975 (near-perfect agreement), a sensitivity of 98.1% and specificity of 100%, for detecting anti-spike glycoprotein antibodies. Conclusions and relevanceEluates from DBS samples are a reliable and reproducible source of antibodies to be used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. The use of DBS sampling could complement the use of venepuncture in the immunosurveillance of COVID-19 in both low and high income settings.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background: Detecting antibody responses during and after SARS-CoV-2 infection is essential in determining the seroepidemiology of the virus and the potential role of antibody in disease. Scalable, sensitive and specific serological assays are essential to this process. The detection of antibody in hospitalized patients with severe disease has proven straightforward; detecting responses in subjects with mild disease and asymptomatic infections has proven less reliable. We hypothesized that the suboptimal sensitivity of antibody assays and the compartmentalization of the antibody response may contribute to this effect. Methods: We systemically developed an ELISA assay, optimising different antigens and amplification steps, in serum and saliva from symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2-infected subjects. Results: Using trimeric spike glycoprotein, rather than nucleocapsid enabled detection of responses in individuals with low antibody responses. IgG1 and IgG3 predominate to both antigens, but more anti-spike IgG1 than IgG3 was detectable. All antigens were effective for detecting responses in hospitalized patients. Anti-spike, but not nucleocapsid, IgG, IgA and IgM antibody responses were readily detectable in saliva from non-hospitalized symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. Antibody responses in saliva and serum were largely independent of each other and symptom reporting. Conclusions. Detecting antibody responses in both saliva and serum is optimal for determining virus exposure and understanding immune responses after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Funding. This work was funded by the University of Birmingham, the National Institute for Health Research (UK), the NIH National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the University of Southampton.