Detection of IgM and IgG antibodies in patients with coronavirus disease 2019

Antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Progress in characterising the humoral immune response to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been rapid but areas of uncertainty persist. Assessment of the full range of evidence generated to date to understand the characteristics of the antibody response, its dynamics over time, its determinants and the immunity it confers will have a range of clinical and policy implications for this novel pathogen. This review comprehensively evaluated evidence describing the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 published from 01/01/2020-26/06/2020.

METHODS

Systematic review. Keyword-structured searches were carried out in MEDLINE, Embase and COVID-19 Primer. Articles were independently screened on title, abstract and full text by two researchers, with arbitration of disagreements. Data were double-extracted into a pre-designed template, and studies critically appraised using a modified version of the Public Health Ontario Meta-tool for Quality Appraisal of Public Health Evidence (MetaQAT) tool, with resolution of disagreements by consensus. Findings were narratively synthesised.

RESULTS

150 papers were included. Most studies (113 or 75%) were observational in design, were based wholly or primarily on data from hospitalised patients (108, 72%) and had important methodological limitations. Few considered mild or asymptomatic infection. Antibody dynamics were well described in the acute phase, up to around three months from disease onset, but the picture regarding correlates of the antibody response was inconsistent. IgM was consistently detected before IgG in included studies, peaking at weeks two to five and declining over a further three to five weeks post-symptom onset depending on the patient group; IgG peaked around weeks three to seven post-symptom onset then plateaued, generally persisting for at least eight weeks. Neutralising antibodies were detectable within seven to 15 days following disease onset, with levels increasing until days 14-22 before levelling and then decreasing, but titres were lower in those with asymptomatic or clinically mild disease. Specific and potent neutralising antibodies have been isolated from convalescent plasma. Cross-reactivity but limited cross-neutralisation with other human coronaviridae was reported. Evidence for protective immunity in vivo was limited to small, short-term animal studies, showing promising initial results in the immediate recovery phase.

CONCLUSIONS

Literature on antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 is of variable quality with considerable heterogeneity of methods, study participants, outcomes measured and assays used. Although acute phase antibody dynamics are well described, longer-term patterns are much less well evidenced. Comprehensive assessment of the role of demographic characteristics and disease severity on antibody responses is needed. Initial findings of low neutralising antibody titres and possible waning of titres over time may have implications for sero-surveillance and disease control policy, although further evidence is needed. The detection of potent neutralising antibodies in convalescent plasma is important in the context of development of therapeutics and vaccines. Due to limitations with the existing evidence base, large, cross-national cohort studies using appropriate statistical analysis and standardised serological assays and clinical classifications should be prioritised.

The role of serum specific- SARS-CoV-2 antibody in COVID-19 patients

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), responsible for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has rapidly spread, resulting in considerable casualties and serious economic loss worldwide. Disease severity and related symptoms markedly vary among individuals. A large number of patients present atypical symptoms, which represent a big challenge for early diagnosis and prompt infection source isolation. Currently, COVID-19 diagnosis predominantly depends on nucleic acid tests (NAT) for SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory specimens, but this method presents a high rate of false negative results. Therefore, serum antibody measurement has been rapidly developed as a supplementary method with the aim of improving diagnostic accuracy. Further, serum antibody levels might help to identify the infection stage, asymptomatic carriers, and patients with diverging severities and to monitor convalescent plasma therapy. In the current review, we aim to present comprehensive evidence to clarify the utility of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in COVID-19 patients as a reference for use in the clinic.

Point of Care Diagnostics in the Age of COVID-19

The recent outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its associated serious respiratory disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), poses a major threat to global public health. Owing to the lack of vaccine and effective treatments, many countries have been overwhelmed with an exponential spread of the virus and surge in the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases. Current standard diagnostic methods are inadequate for widespread testing as they suffer from prolonged turn-around times (>12 h) and mostly rely on high-biosafety-level laboratories and well-trained technicians. Point-of-care (POC) tests have the potential to vastly improve healthcare in several ways, ranging from enabling earlier detection and easier monitoring of disease to reaching remote populations. In recent years, the field of POC diagnostics has improved markedly with the advent of micro- and nanotechnologies. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, POC technologies have been rapidly innovated to address key limitations faced in existing standard diagnostic methods. This review summarizes and compares the latest available POC immunoassay, nucleic acid-based and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats- (CRISPR)-mediated tests for SARS-CoV-2 detection that we anticipate aiding healthcare facilities to control virus infection and prevent subsequent spread.

A retrospective comparison of drugs against COVID-19

•

Hydroxychloroquine is an efficient candidate drug against COVID-19.

•

Oseltamivir can be prudently considered in combination therapy.

•

Drug repurposing is a promising way to combat SARS-CoV-2 infection.

•

Comparison of drug effects against COVID-19 is instructive in the pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) has posed serious threats to the general population. To relieve the crisis, a comparison of drug effects against COVID-19 is instructive. Between January 27, 2020 and March 21, 2020, a total of 333 patients treated with arbidol, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, or oseltamivir monotherapy, having definite outcomes and serological antibody detection results, were retrospectively analyzed. The hydroxychloroquine group had a significantly reduced duration of hospital stay than the arbidol and corticosteroids groups. The oseltamivir group had a significantly shorter length of hospital stay than the arbidol, corticosteroids, and lopinavir/ritonavir groups. The hydroxychloroquine group had a significantly higher IgM titer than the other four groups and exhibited significantly higher IgG levels than the arbidol, lopinavir/ritonavir, and oseltamivir groups. Our findings indicated that hydroxychloroquine might have the potential for efficient COVID-19 management, while oseltamivir should be prudently considered in combination therapy.

Evaluating ELISA, Immunofluorescence, and Lateral Flow Assay for SARS-CoV-2 Serologic Assays

Background

The SARS-CoV-2 outbreak has emerged at the end of 2019. Aside from the detection of viral genome with specific RT-PCR, there is a growing need for reliable determination of the serological status. We aimed at evaluating five SARS-CoV-2 serology assays.

Methods

An in-house immunofluorescence assay (IFA), two ELISA kits (EUROIMMUN^® ELISA SARS-CoV-2 IgG and NovaLisa^® SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM) and two lateral flow assays (T-Tek^® SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM Antibody Test Kit and Sure Bio-tech^® SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG Antibody Rapid Test) were compared on 40 serums from RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and 10 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR negative subjects as controls.

Results

Control subjects tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies with all five systems. Estimated sensitivities varied from 35.5 to 71.0% for IgG detection and from 19.4 to 64.5% for IgM detection. For IgG, in-house IFA, EuroImmun, T-Tek and NovaLisa displayed 50–72.5% agreement with other systems except IFA vs EuroImmun and T-Tek vs NovaLisa. Intermethod agreement for IgM determination was between 30 and 72.5%.

Discussion

The overall intermethod agreement was moderate. This inconsistency could be explained by the diversity of assay methods, antigens used and immunoglobulin isotype tested. Estimated sensitivities were low, highlighting the limited value of antibody detection in CoVID-19.

Conclusion

Comparison of five systems for SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM antibodies showed limited sensitivity and overall concordance. The place and indications of serological status assessment with currently available tools in the CoVID-19 pandemic need further evaluations.

Quick COVID-19 Healers Sustain Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Production

Antibodies are key immune effectors that confer protection against pathogenic threats. The nature and longevity of the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 infection are not well defined. We charted longitudinal antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in 92 subjects after symptomatic COVID-19. Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 are unimodally distributed over a broad range, with symptom severity correlating directly with virus-specific antibody magnitude. Seventy-six subjects followed longitudinally to ∼100 days demonstrated marked heterogeneity in antibody duration dynamics. Virus-specific IgG decayed substantially in most individuals, whereas a distinct subset had stable or increasing antibody levels in the same time frame despite similar initial antibody magnitudes. These individuals with increasing responses recovered rapidly from symptomatic COVID-19 disease, harbored increased somatic mutations in virus-specific memory B cell antibody genes, and had persistent higher frequencies of previously activated CD4+ T cells. These findings illuminate an efficient immune phenotype that connects symptom clearance speed to differential antibody durability dynamics.

Sensitive and Simultaneous Detection of SARS-CoV-2-Specific IgM/IgG Using Lateral Flow Immunoassay Based on Dual-Mode Quantum Dot Nanobeads

A rapid and accurate method for detection of virus (SARS-CoV-2)-specific antibodies is important to contain the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak, which is still urgently needed. Here, we develop a colorimetric-fluorescent dual-mode lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) biosensor for rapid, sensitive, and simultaneous detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM and IgG in human serum using spike (S) protein-conjugated SiO2@Au@QD nanobeads (NBs) as labels. The assay only needs 1 μL of the serum sample, can be completed within 15 min, and is 100 times more sensitive than the colloidal gold-based LFIA. Two detection modes of our biosensor are available: the colorimetric mode for rapid screening of the patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection without any special instrument and the fluorescent mode for sensitive and quantitative analyses to determine the concentrations of specific IgM/IgG in human serum and detect the infection early and precisely. We validated the proposed method using 16 positive serum samples from patients with COVID-19 and 41 negative samples from patients with other viral respiratory infections. The results demonstrated that combined detection of virus-specific IgM and IgG via SiO2@Au@QD LFIA can identify 100% of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection with 100% specificity.

Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serology tests for COVID-19: impact of assay design and post-symptom-onset intervals

Serology detection is recognized for its sensitivity in convalescent patients with COVID-19, in comparison with nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs). This article aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of serologic methods for COVID-19 based on assay design and post-symptom-onset intervals. Two authors independently searched PubMed, Cochrane library, Ovid, EBSCO for case-control, longitudinal and cohort studies that determined the diagnostic accuracy of serology tests in comparison with NAATs in COVID-19 cases and used QUADAS-2 for quality assessment. Pooled accuracy was analysed using INLA method. A total of 27 studies were included in this meta-analysis, with 4 cohort, 16 case-control and 7 longitudinal studies and 4565 participants. Serology tests had the lowest sensitivity at 0-7 days after symptom onset and the highest at >14 days. TAB had a better sensitivity than IgG or IgM only. Using combined nucleocapsid (N) and spike(S) protein had a better sensitivity compared to N or S protein only. Lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) had a lower sensitivity than enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) and chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA). Serology tests will play an important role in the clinical diagnosis for later stage COVID-19 patients. ELISA tests, detecting TAB or targeting combined N and S proteins had a higher diagnostic sensitivity compared to other methods.

Exploration of turn-positive RT-PCR results and factors related to treatment outcome in COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study

The cause of some patients with negative RT-PCR results experienced turn-positive after treatment remains unclear. In addition, understanding the correlation between changes in clinical data in the course of COVID-19 and treatment outcomes is of great importance in determining the prognosis of COVID-19. To perform cause analysis of RT-PCR turn-positive and the effective screening factors related to treatment outcome in COVID-19. Clinical data, including clinical manifestations, laboratory tests, radiography results, treatment methods and outcomes, were retrospectively collected and analyzed from January to March 2020 in Renmin Hospitals of Wuhan University. 116 COVID-19 patients (40 in recurrent group, 29 in recovered group and 47 in unrecovered group) were recruited. In the recurrent group, white blood cell, Neutrophils, prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time, CD3, CD4, CD8, ratio of CD4/CD8, IgG and C4 complement were of significant difference among the baseline, negative and turn-positive time points. CD19 and CT scan results were found notable difference between recurrent group and recovered group. Odds from CD3, CD4, CD8, CD19, IgM, C3 complement, C4 complement and CT scan results validated associations with clinical outcomes of COVID-19. The so-called recurrence in some COVID-19 patients may be due to the false-negative of nucleic acid test results from nasopharyngeal swabs. Levels of CD3, CD4, CD8, CD19, IgM, C3 complement, C4 complement and CT results were significantly correlated with the outcome of COVID-19. The cellular immunity test could be beneficial to further screen the reliability of RT-PCR test on the basis of CT images.

No Evidence of Re-infection or Person-to-Person Transmission in Cured COVID-19 Patients in Guangzhou, a Retrospective Observational Study

Objectives: To clarify the clinical characteristics of cured patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19), and to clarify the re-infection and person-to-person transmission in the cured.

Methods: A total of 187 cured COVID-19 patients with antibody test were followed up every 2 weeks in this retrospective observational study. Assessment for general condition, symptoms, epidemiological contact history, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay, and antibody tests were performed and recorded. Information from Guangzhou CDC was also screened.

Results: There were 33 (17.6%) patients with negative results for IgG and 35 (18.7%) patients with positive results for IgM. The average days of antibody detection from disease onset were 53.0. PCR assay was positive in 10 (5.3%) patients during the follow-up. Neither IgG nor IgM results showed a relationship with PCR test results (all P > 0.05). Neither re-infection nor person-to-person transmission was found in the cured patients. Factors associated with appearance of antibody comprised hospitalization days (OR: 1.06, 95%CI: 1.02–1.11, P = 0.006) and antibiotics treatment (OR: 3.50, 95%CI: 1.40–8.77, P = 0.007).

Conclusions: In our study, no evidence of person-to-person transmission was found in cured COVID-19 patients. There seemed to be no re-infection in the cured COVID-19 patients in Guangzhou. These finding suggest that the cured do not cause the spread of disease. Additionally, neither IgG nor IgM can be used to replace the PCR test in cured patients.

IgG Antibodies, SARS-CoV-2 Load, and Prognostic Indicators in Patients with Severe and Mild COVID-19 in Japan

We assessed the association of severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) load, IgG antibody level, and prognostic indicators.Twenty-one patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were classified as having severe or mild disease on the basis of average respiratory rate during hospitalization (severe: ≥22 breaths/min; mild: <22 breaths/min). Viral load in nasopharyngeal samples, blood levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), lymphocytes, and D-dimer on admission and plasma immunoglobulin G (IgG) index on Day 7±2 after symptom onset were compared in relation to disease severity. Seven patients had severe disease and 14 had mild disease. Those with severe disease had a significantly higher IgG index (median: 3.75 vs 0.56, p=0.01) and CRP (median: 8.6 vs 1.0 mg/dL, p<0.001) and D-dimer levels (median: 1.65 vs 0.75 μg/mL; p=0.002) and a significantly lower lymphocyte count (median: 1,176 vs 666 cells/μL, p=0.005) and viral load (median: 8.7×10⁶ vs 2.3×10⁴ copies/mL, p=0.005). Furthermore, time from symptom onset to virus disappearance was significantly longer in severe patients (median: 24 vs 17 days, p=0.03). A high IgG index in the early phase of the disease was associated with severe disease and might serve as a prognostic indicator.

Serological Surveillance of COVID-19 Hospitalized Patients in Réunion Island (France) Revealed that Specific Immunoglobulin G Are Rapidly Vanishing in Severe Cases

Humoral immunity is critically important to control COVID-19. Long-term antibody responses remain to be fully characterized in hospitalized patients who have a high risk of death. We compared specific Immunoglobulin responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between two groups, intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU hospitalized patients over several weeks. Plasma specific IgG, IgM, and IgA levels were assessed using a commercial ELISA and compared to an in-house cell-based ELISA. Among the patients analyzed (mean (SD) of age, 64.4 (15.9) years, 19.2% female), 12 (46.2%) were hospitalized in ICU. IgG levels increased in non-ICU cases from the second to the eighth week after symptom onset. By contrast, IgG response was blunted in ICU patients over the same period. ICU patients with hematological malignancies had very weak or even undetectable IgG levels. While both groups had comparable levels of specific IgM antibodies, we found much lower levels of specific IgA in ICU versus non-ICU patients. In conclusion, COVID-19 ICU patients may be at risk of reinfection as their specific IgG response is declining in a matter of weeks. Antibody neutralizing assays and studies on specific cellular immunity will have to be performed.

Clinical characteristics of 134 convalescent patients with COVID-19 in Guizhou, China

Background

Previous studies have focused on the clinical characteristics of hospitalized patients with the novel 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Limited data are available for convalescent patients. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical characteristics of discharged COVID-19 patients.

Methods

In this retrospective study, we extracted data for 134 convalescent patients with COVID-19 in Guizhou Provincial Staff Hospital from February 15 to March 31, 2020. Cases were analyzed on the basis of demographic, clinical, and laboratory data as well as radiological features.

Results

Of 134 convalescent patients with COVID-19, 19 (14.2%) were severe cases, while 115 (85.8%) were non-severe cases. The median patient age was 33 years (IQR, 21.8 to 46.3), and the cohort included 69 men and 65 women. Compared with non-severe cases, severe patients were older and had more chronic comorbidities, especially hypertension, diabetes, and thyroid disease (P < 0.05). Leukopenia was present in 32.1% of the convalescent patients and lymphocytopenia was present in 6.7%, both of which were more common in severe patients. 48 (35.8%) of discharged patients had elevated levels of alanine aminotransferase, which was more common in adults than in children (40.2% vs 13.6%, P = 0.018). A normal chest CT was found in 61 (45.5%) patients during rehabilitation. Severe patients had more ground-glass opacity, bilateral patchy shadowing, and fibrosis. No significant differences were observed in the positive rate of IgG and/or IgM antibodies between severe and non-severe patients.

Conclusion

Leukopenia, lymphopenia, ground-glass opacity, and fibrosis are common in discharged severe COVID-19 patients, and liver injury is common in discharged adult patients. We suggest physicians develop follow-up treatment plans based on the different clinical characteristics of convalescent patients.

Roadmap to the Bioanalytical Testing of COVID-19: From Sample Collection to Disease Surveillance

The disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has led to a global pandemic with tremendous mortality, morbidity, and economic loss. The current lack of effective vaccines and treatments places tremendous value on widespread screening, early detection, and contact tracing of COVID-19 for controlling its spread and minimizing the resultant health and societal impact. Bioanalytical diagnostic technologies have played a critical role in the mitigation of the COVID-19 pandemic and will continue to be foundational in the prevention of the subsequent waves of this pandemic along with future infectious disease outbreaks. In this Review, we aim at presenting a roadmap to the bioanalytical testing of COVID-19, with a focus on the performance metrics as well as the limitations of various techniques. The state-of-the-art technologies, mostly limited to centralized laboratories, set the clinical metrics against which the emerging technologies are measured. Technologies for point-of-care and do-it-yourself testing are rapidly emerging, which open the route for testing in the community, at home, and at points-of-entry to widely screen and monitor individuals for enabling normal life despite of an infectious disease pandemic. The combination of different classes of diagnostic technologies (centralized and point-of-care and relying on multiple biomarkers) are needed for effective diagnosis, treatment selection, prognosis, patient monitoring, and epidemiological surveillance in the event of major pandemics such as COVID-19.

Orthogonal SARS-CoV-2 Serological Assays Enable Surveillance of Low-Prevalence Communities and Reveal Durable Humoral Immunity

We conducted a serological study to define correlates of immunity against SARS-CoV-2. Compared to those with mild coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, individuals with severe disease exhibited elevated virus-neutralizing titers and antibodies against the nucleocapsid (N) and the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein. Age and sex played lesser roles. All cases, including asymptomatic individuals, seroconverted by 2 weeks after PCR confirmation. Spike RBD and S2 and neutralizing antibodies remained detectable through 5-7 months after onset, whereas α-N titers diminished. Testing 5,882 members of the local community revealed only 1 sample with seroreactivity to both RBD and S2 that lacked neutralizing antibodies. This fidelity could not be achieved with either RBD or S2 alone. Thus, inclusion of multiple independent assays improved the accuracy of antibody tests in low-seroprevalence communities and revealed differences in antibody kinetics depending on the antigen. We conclude that neutralizing antibodies are stably produced for at least 5-7 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Point-of-Care Biosensor-Based Diagnosis of COVID-19 Holds Promise to Combat Current and Future Pandemics

Efficient and rapid detection of viruses plays an extremely important role in disease prevention, diagnosis, and environmental monitoring. Early screening of viral infection among the population has the potential to combat the spread of infection. However, the traditional methods of virus detection being used currently, such as plate culturing and quantitative RT-PCR, give promising results, but they are time-consuming and require expert analysis and costly equipment and reagents; therefore, they are not affordable by people in low socio-economic groups in developing countries. Further, mass or bulk testing chosen by many governments to tackle the pandemic situation has led to severe shortages of testing kits and reagents and hence are affecting the demand and supply chain drastically. We tried to include all the reported current scenario-based biosensors such as electrochemical, optical, and microfluidics, which have the potential to replace mainstream diagnostic methods and therefore could pave the way to combat COVID-19. Apart from this, we have also provided information on commercially available biosensors for detection of SARS-CoV-2 along with the challenges in development of better diagnostic approaches. It is therefore expected that the content of this review will help researchers to design and develop more sensitive advanced commercial biosensor devices for early diagnosis of viral infection, which can open up avenues for better and more specific therapeutic outcomes.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies in District Srinagar, northern India - A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Prevalence of IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 infection provides essential information for deciding disease prevention and mitigation measures. We estimate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies in District Srinagar.

METHODS

2906 persons >18 years of age selected from hospital visitors across District Srinagar participated in the study. We tested samples for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies using a chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay-based serologic test.

RESULTS

Age- and gender-standardized seroprevalence was 3.6% (95% CI 2.9% to 4.3%). Age 30-69 years, a recent history of symptoms of an influenza-like-illness, and a history of being placed under quarantine were significantly related to higher odds of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies. The estimated number of SARS-CoV-2 infections during the two weeks preceding the study, adjusted for test performance, was 32602 with an estimated (median) infection-to-known-case ratio of 46 (95% CI 36 to 57).

CONCLUSIONS

The seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies is low in the District. A large proportion of the population is still susceptible to the infection. A sizeable number of infections remain undetected, and a substantial proportion of people with symptoms compatible with COVID-19 are not tested.

Herd Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 among the Population in Saint-Petersburg during the COVID-19 Epidemic

The first case of COVID-19 was diagnosed in St. Petersburg on March 2, 2020; the period of increase in the incidence lasted for 10 weeks, the maximum rates were recorded in mid-May, and subsequently there was a statistically significant decrease in the incidence.

Objective: to determine the level and structure of community immunity to SARS-CoV-2 among the population of St. Petersburg during the period of intensive spread of COVID-19.

Materials and methods. Selection of volunteers for the study was carried out through interviewing and randomization. The exclusion criterion was active COVID-19 infection at the time of the survey. 2713 people aged 1 to 70 years and above were  examined for the presence of specific antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Antibodies were detected by enzyme immunoassay.

Results and discussion. Studies have shown that in St. Petersburg, in the active phase of COVID-19 epidemic, there was a moderate seroprevalence to SARS-CoV-2, which amounted to 26 %, against the background of a high frequency (84.5 %) of asymptomatic infection in seropositive individuals who did not have a history of COVID-19 disease, positive PCR result and ARI symptoms on the day of examination. The maximum indicators of herd immunity were established in children 1–6 years old (31.1 %), 7–13 years old (37.7 %) and people over 70 years old (30.4 %). Differences in the level of seroprevalence in the age groups of 18–49 years are statistically significant. The highest level of seroprevalence was found among the unemployed (29.7 %), healthcare workers (27.1 %), education sector (26.4 %) and business sector personnel (25 %). In convalescents, COVID-19 antibodies are produced in 75 % of cases. In individuals with positive result of PCR analysis carried out earlier, antibodies are detected in 70 % of the cases. The results of the study of herd immunity to SARS-CoV-2 are essential to forecast the development of the epidemiological situation, as well as to plan measures for specific and non-specific prevention of COVID-19. 

Assessment of the Herd Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 among the Population of the Leningrad Region during the COVID-19 Epidemic

The first case of COVID-19 was registered in the Leningrad Region on March 13, 2020. The period of increasing intensity of the epidemic process lasted 8 weeks. One month after reaching the maximum incidence rate, a study was organized to determine seroprevalence to COVID-19 among the population of the Region.

Objective of the study was to determine the level and structure of community immunity to SARS-CoV-2 virus in the population of the Leningrad Region in the period of intensive COVID-19 transmission.

Materials and methods. The work was carried out within the framework of the Rospotrebnadzor project on assessment of community immunity to the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the population of the Russian Federation. The content of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 was determined applying ELISA using a kit for the analysis of human serum or blood plasma for the presence of specific IgG to the nucleocapsid of the SARS-CoV-2 virus , manufactured by the State Scientific Center of Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology (Obolensk) in accordance with the instructions for use.

Results and discussion. The study has showed that the herd immunity of the population of the Leningrad Region was 20.7 %. The maximum level has been established in children 1–6 years old (42.3 %) and people over 70 years old (29.0 %). The highest level of seropositivity, except for children and older people, was found among the unemployed (25.1 %). The lowest level of seroprevalence was detected in civil servants (12.8 %) and military personnel (16.7 %). It has been shown that the risk of infection increases by 1.5 times in case of contacts with COVID-19 patients. After exposure to COVID-19 virus, antibodies are produced in 82.1 % of the cases. In individuals with a positive PCR test result obtained earlier, antibodies are detected in 82.8 % of cases. The share of asymptomatic forms among seropositive residents of the Leningrad Region was 86.9 %. The results of assessing the herd immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in the population of the Leningrad Region indicate that during the period of intensive COVID-19 transmission, an average level of seroprevalence was formed. A significant proportion of asymptomatic forms of infection characterizes the high intensity of the latently developing epidemic process. The results obtained should be taken into account when organizing preventive measures, including vaccination, and predicting morbidity rates. 

Rapid Antibody-Based COVID-19 Mass Surveillance: Relevance, Challenges, and Prospects in a Pandemic and Post-Pandemic World

The aggressive outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) as COVID-19 (coronavirus disease-2019) pandemic demands rapid and simplified testing tools for its effective management. Increased mass testing and surveillance are crucial for controlling the disease spread, obtaining better pandemic statistics, and developing realistic epidemiological models. Despite the advantages of nucleic acid- and antigen-based tests such as accuracy, specificity, and non-invasive approaches of sample collection, they can only detect active infections. Antibodies (immunoglobulins) are produced by the host immune system within a few days after infection and persist in the blood for at least several weeks after infection resolution. Antibody-based tests have provided a substitute and effective method of ultra-rapid detection for multiple contagious disease outbreaks in the past, including viral diseases such as SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) and MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome). Thus, although not highly suitable for early diagnosis, antibody-based methods can be utilized to detect past infections hidden in the population, including asymptomatic ones. In an active community spread scenario of a disease that can provide a bigger window for mass detections and a practical approach for continuous surveillance. These factors encouraged researchers to investigate means of improving antibody-based rapid tests and employ them as reliable, reproducible, sensitive, specific, and economic tools for COVID-19 mass testing and surveillance. The development and integration of such immunoglobulin-based tests can transform the pandemic diagnosis by moving the same out of the clinics and laboratories into community testing sites and homes. This review discusses the principle, technology, and strategies being used in antibody-based testing at present. It also underlines the immense prospect of immunoglobulin-based testing and the efficacy of repeated planned deployment in pandemic management and post-pandemic sustainable screenings globally.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 IgG Targeting Nucleocapsid or Spike Protein by Four High-Throughput Immunoassays Authorized for Emergency Use

A total of 1,200 serum samples that were tested for SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody using the Abbott Architect immunoassay targeting the nucleocapsid protein were run in 3 SARS-CoV-2 IgG immunoassays targeting spike proteins (DiaSorin Liaison, Ortho Vitros, and Euroimmun). Consensus-positive and consensus-negative interpretations were defined as qualitative agreement in at least 3 of the 4 assays. Agreement of the 4 individual assays with a consensus-negative interpretation (n = 610) ranged from 96.7% to 100%, and agreement with a consensus-positive interpretation (n = 584) ranged from 94.3% to 100%. Laboratory-developed inhibition assays were utilized to evaluate 49 consensus-negative samples that were positive in only one assay; true-positive reactivity was confirmed in only 2 of these 49 (4%) samples. These findings demonstrate very high levels of agreement among 4 SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays authorized for emergency use, regardless of antigen target or assay format. Although false-positive reactivity was identified, its occurrence was rare (no more than 1.7% of samples for a given assay).

The dynamics of immune response in COVID-19 patients with different illness severity

This study aimed to analyze the dynamic changes of lymphocyte subsets and specific antibodies in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with different illness severity. The amounts of lymphocyte subsets and the levels of immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG antibody were retrospectively analyzed in 707 COVID-19 cases. The amounts of lymphocyte subsets were significantly decreased with the increased severity of illness and the levels of IgM and IgG were lower in critical cases than severe and moderate cases. In deceased patients, the lymphocytes subsets were significantly lower than recovered patients. However, the relationship between the levels of IgM and IgG and the amounts of lymphocyte subsets were not significantly correlated. During different stages of COVID-19, the total T cell, CD4+ T cell, and CD8+ T cell counts were gradually recovered to the normal levels in severe and critical groups but the changing trend was relatively stable in the moderate group. The production of IgM and IgG antibodies were delayed in critical groups but also could reach the peak levels at one month after illness onset and decreased to background levels. To detect the kinetics of lymphocytes and antibodies has important clinical value in predicting the illness severity and understanding the pathogenesis of COVID-19.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in people with an acute loss in their sense of smell and/or taste in a community-based population in London, UK: An observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Loss of smell and taste are commonly reported symptoms associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, the seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies in people with acute loss of smell and/or taste is unknown. The study aimed to determine the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a community-based population with acute loss of smell and/or taste and to compare the frequency of COVID-19 associated symptoms in participants with and without SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. It also evaluated whether smell or taste loss are indicative of COVID-19 infection.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Text messages, sent via primary care centers in London, United Kingdom, invited people with loss of smell and/or taste in the preceding month, to participate. Recruitment took place between 23 April 2020 and 14 May 2020. A total of 590 participants enrolled via a web-based platform and responded to questions about loss of smell and taste and other COVID-19-related symptoms. Mean age was 39.4 years (SD ± 12.0) and 69.1% (n = 392) of participants were female. A total of 567 (96.1%) had a telemedicine consultation during which their COVID-19-related symptoms were verified and a lateral flow immunoassay test that detected SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies was undertaken under medical supervision. A total of 77.6% of 567 participants with acute smell and/or taste loss had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies; of these, 39.8% (n = 175) had neither cough nor fever. New loss of smell was more prevalent in participants with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, compared with those without antibodies (93.4% versus 78.7%, p < 0.001), whereas taste loss was equally prevalent (90.2% versus 89.0%, p = 0.738). Seropositivity for SARS-CoV-2 was 3 times more likely in participants with smell loss (OR 2.86; 95% CI 1.27-6.36; p < 0.001) compared with those with taste loss. The limitations of this study are the lack of a general population control group, the self-reported nature of the smell and taste changes, and the fact our methodology does not take into account the possibility that a population subset may not seroconvert to develop SARS-CoV-2 antibodies post-COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that recent loss of smell is a highly specific COVID-19 symptom and should be considered more generally in guiding case isolation, testing, and treatment of COVID-19.

TRIALS REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04377815.

Development and Validation of the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoassay as a Highly Specific Tool for Determining Past Exposure to SARS-CoV-2

The Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay (Roche Diagnostics) was developed to provide accurate, reliable detection of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We evaluated sensitivity, specificity, cross-reactivity, and agreement with a vesicular stomatitis virus-based pseudoneutralization assay for the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay. Sensitivity and agreement between Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay and pseudoneutralization assay measurements were evaluated using samples from patients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, a majority of whom were hospitalized. Specificity was evaluated using samples from routine diagnostic testing/blood donors collected before December 2019 and thus deemed negative for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. Cross-reactivity was evaluated using samples containing a wide range of potentially cross-reacting analytes, purchased from commercial vendors. For sensitivity and specificity, point estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Agreement between the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay and the pseudoneutralization assay was calculated. The sensitivity of the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay in patients with prior PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection was 99.5% (95% CI, 97.0 to 100.0%) at ≥14 days post-PCR confirmation. Overall specificity (n = 10,453) was 99.80% (95% CI, 99.69 to 99.88%). Only 4/792 samples containing potential cross-reacting analytes were reactive with the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay, resulting in an overall specificity in this cohort of 99.5% (95% CI, 98.6 to 99.9%). Positive, negative, and overall agreement (n = 46) between the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay and the pseudoneutralization assay were 86.4% (95% CI, 73.3 to 93.6%), 100% (95% CI, 34.2 to 100%), and 87.0% (95% CI, 74.3 to 93.9%), respectively. The Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay demonstrated high sensitivity (99.5% at ≥14 days post-PCR confirmation) and specificity (99.80%), supporting its use as a tool for identification of past SARS-CoV-2 infection, including use in populations with low disease prevalence.

Immune Response to COVID-19: Can We Benefit from the SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV Pandemic Experience?

The global range and high fatality rate of the newest human coronavirus (HCoV) pandemic has made SARS-CoV-2 the focus of the scientific world. Next-generation sequencing of the viral genome and a phylogenetic analysis have shown the high homology of SARS-CoV-2 to other HCoVs that have led to local epidemics in the past. The experience acquired in SARS and MERS epidemics may prove useful in understanding the SARS-CoV-2 pathomechanism and lead to effective treatment and potential vaccine development. This study summarizes the immune response to SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2 and focuses on T cell response, humoral immunity, and complement system activation in different stages of HCoVs infections. The study also presents the quantity and frequency of T cell responses, particularly CD4+ and CD8+; the profile of cytokine production and secretion; and its relation to T cell type, disease severity, and utility in prognostics of the course of SARS, MERS, and COVID-19 outbreaks. The role of interferons in the therapy of these infections is also discussed. Moreover, the kinetics of specific antibody production, the correlation between humoral and cellular immune response and the immunogenicity of the structural HCoVs proteins and their utility in the development of a vaccine against SARS, MERS, and COVID-19 has been updated.

Testing for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19): a systematic review and clinical guide to molecular and serological in-vitro diagnostic assays

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has demanded rapid upscaling of in-vitro diagnostic assays to enable mass screening and testing of high-risk groups, and simultaneous ascertainment of robust data on past SARS-CoV-2 exposure at an individual and a population level. To meet the exponential demand in testing, there has been an accelerated development of both molecular and serological assays across a plethora of platforms. The present review discusses the current literature on these modalities, including nucleic acid amplification tests, direct viral antigen tests and the rapidly expanding laboratory-based and point of care serological tests. This suite of complementary tests will inform crucial decisions by healthcare providers and policy makers, and understanding their strengths and limitations will be critical to their judicious application for the development of algorithmic approaches to treatment and public health strategies.

Clinical characteristics, therapeutic management, and prognostic factors of adult COVID-19 inpatients with hematological malignancies

Patients with hematological malignancies with immunodeficiency are at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection. We retrospective summarized clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) inpatients with hematological malignancies, shared treatment experiences, and analysis prognostic factors. Fourteen patients were enrolled. The median duration of viral shedding was 27.5 days in survivors. The median duration of time to death was 13 days in non-survivors. Non-survivors tend to present lower neutrophil count, more imaging finding of bilateral diffuse patch opacities, more undergoing intensive chemotherapy or immunosuppression. Laboratory and image findings were atypical and diverse. COVID-19 inpatients undergoing intensive chemotherapy or immunosuppression might have increased risk of death. The diagnostic value of specific antibody detection is limited. Therefore, adult COVID-19 inpatients with hematological malignancies present atypical, severe symptoms, decreased virus clearance ability, abnormal antibody response and poor outcome. During the epidemic, the pros and cons need to be carefully weighed while selecting the treatment methods.

Detection, prevalence, and duration of humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2 under conditions of limited population exposure

We conducted an extensive serological study to quantify population-level exposure and define correlates of immunity against SARS-CoV-2. We found that relative to mild COVID-19 cases, individuals with severe disease exhibited elevated authentic virus-neutralizing titers and antibody levels against nucleocapsid (N) and the receptor binding domain (RBD) and the S2 region of spike protein. Unlike disease severity, age and sex played lesser roles in serological responses. All cases, including asymptomatic individuals, seroconverted by 2 weeks post-PCR confirmation. RBD- and S2-specific and neutralizing antibody titers remained elevated and stable for at least 2-3 months post-onset, whereas those against N were more variable with rapid declines in many samples. Testing of 5882 self-recruited members of the local community demonstrated that 1.24% of individuals showed antibody reactivity to RBD. However, 18% (13/73) of these putative seropositive samples failed to neutralize authentic SARS-CoV-2 virus. Each of the neutralizing, but only 1 of the non-neutralizing samples, also displayed potent reactivity to S2. Thus, inclusion of multiple independent assays markedly improved the accuracy of antibody tests in low seroprevalence communities and revealed differences in antibody kinetics depending on the viral antigen. In contrast to other reports, we conclude that immunity is durable for at least several months after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Characteristics and roles of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-specific antibodies in patients with different severities of coronavirus 19

The diagnosis of coronavirus 19 (COVID-19) relies mainly upon viral nucleic acid detection, but false negatives can lead to missed diagnosis and misdiagnosis; severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific antibody detection is convenient, safe and highly sensitive. Immunoglobulin (Ig)M and IgG are commonly used to serologically diagnose COVID-19; however, the role of IgA is not well known. We aimed to quantify the levels of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM, IgA and IgG antibodies, identify changes in them based on COVID-19 severity, and establish the significance of combined antibody detection. COVID-19 patients, divided into a severe and critical group and a moderate group, and non-COVID-19 patients with respiratory disease were included in this study. A chemiluminescence method was used to detect the levels of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM, IgA and IgG in the blood samples from the three groups. Epidemiological characteristics, symptoms, blood test results and other data were recorded for all patients. Compared to the traditional IgM-IgG combined antibodies, IgA-IgG combined antibodies are more effective for diagnosing COVID-19. During the disease process, IgA appeared first and disappeared last. All three antibodies had significantly higher levels in COVID-19 patients than in non-COVID-19 patients. IgA and IgG were also higher for severe and critical disease than for moderate disease. All antibodies were at or near low levels at the time of tracheal extubation in critical patients. Detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific combined IgA-IgG antibodies is advantageous in diagnosing COVID-19. IgA detection is suitable during early and late stages of the disease. IgA and IgG levels correspond to disease severity.

Review of Current Advances in Serologic Testing for COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

To examine and summarize the current literature on serologic methods for the detection of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

METHODS

A literature review was performed using searches in databases including PubMed, medRxiv, and bioRxiv. Thirty-two peer-reviewed papers and 23 preprints were examined.

RESULTS

The studies included lateral flow immunoassay, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, chemiluminescence immunoassay, and neutralizing antibody assays. The use of all major SARS-CoV-2 antigens was demonstrated to have diagnostic value. Assays measuring total antibody reactivity had the highest sensitivity. In addition, all the methods provided opportunities to characterize the humoral immune response by isotype. The combined use of IgM and IgG detection resulted in a higher sensitivity than that observed when detecting either isotype alone. Although IgA was rarely studied, it was also demonstrated to be a sensitive marker of infection, and levels correlated with disease severity and neutralizing activity.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of serologic testing, in conjunction with reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing, was demonstrated to significantly increase the sensitivity of detection of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. There was conflicting evidence regarding whether antibody titers correlated with clinical severity. However, preliminary investigations indicated some immunoassays may be a surrogate for the prediction of neutralizing antibody titers and the selection of recovered patients for convalescent serum donation.

A comprehensive review of COVID-19 characteristics

In December 2019, a novel coronavirus, named Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or (2019-nCoV) with unknown origin spread in Hubei province of China. The epidemic disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 called coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). The presence of COVID-19 was manifested by several symptoms, ranging from asymptomatic/mild symptoms to severe illness and death. The viral infection expanded internationally and WHO announced a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. To quickly diagnose and control such a highly infectious disease, suspicious individuals were isolated and diagnostic/treatment procedures were developed through patients' epidemiological and clinical data. Early in the COVID-19 outbreak, WHO invited hundreds of researchers from around the world to develop a rapid quality diagnosis, treatment and vaccines, but so far no specific antiviral treatment or vaccine has been approved by the FDA. At present, COVID-19 is managed by available antiviral drugs to improve the symptoms, and in severe cases, supportive care including oxygen and mechanical ventilation is used for infected patients. However, due to the worldwide spread of the virus, COVID-19 has become a serious concern in the medical community. According to the current data of WHO, the number of infected and dead cases has increased to 8,708,008 and 461,715, respectively (Dec 2019 -June 2020). Given the high mortality rate and economic damage to various communities to date, great efforts must be made to produce successful drugs and vaccines against 2019-nCoV infection. For this reason, first of all, the characteristics of the virus, its pathogenicity, and its infectious pathways must be well known. Thus, the main purpose of this review is to provide an overview of this epidemic disease based on the current evidence.

Point-of-Care Diagnostics of COVID-19: From Current Work to Future Perspectives

Coronaviruses have received global concern since 2003, when an outbreak caused by SARS-CoV emerged in China. Later on, in 2012, the Middle-East respiratory syndrome spread in Saudi Arabia, caused by MERS-CoV. Currently, the global crisis is caused by the pandemic SARS-CoV-2, which belongs to the same lineage of SARS-CoV. In response to the urgent need of diagnostic tools, several lab-based and biosensing techniques have been proposed so far. Five main areas have been individuated and discussed in terms of their strengths and weaknesses. The cell-culture detection and the microneutralization tests are still considered highly reliable methods. The genetic screening, featuring the well-established Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), represents the gold standard for virus detection in nasopharyngeal swabs. On the other side, immunoassays were developed, either by screening/antigen recognition of IgM/IgG or by detecting the whole virus, in blood and sera. Next, proteomic mass-spectrometry (MS)-based methodologies have also been proposed for the analysis of swab samples. Finally, virus-biosensing devices were efficiently designed. Both electrochemical immunosensors and eye-based technologies have been described, showing detection times lower than 10 min after swab introduction. Alternative to swab-based techniques, lateral flow point-of-care immunoassays are already commercially available for the analysis of blood samples. Such biosensing devices hold the advantage of being portable for on-site testing in hospitals, airports, and hotspots, virtually without any sample treatment or complicated lab precautions.

Recent Advancements in the Diagnosis, Prevention, and Prospective Drug Therapy of COVID-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (CoV)-2 (SARS-CoV-2), previously called 2019 novel CoV, emerged from China in late December 2019. This virus causes CoV disease-19 (COVID-19), which has been proven a global pandemic leading to a major outbreak. As of June 19, 2020, the data from the World Health Organization (WHO) showed more than 8.7 million confirmed cases in over 200 countries/regions. The WHO has declared COVID-19 as the sixth public health emergency of international concern on January 30, 2020. CoVs cause illnesses that range in severity from the common cold to severe respiratory illnesses and death. Nevertheless, with technological advances and imperative lessons gained from prior outbreaks, humankind is better outfitted to deal with the latest emerging group of CoVs. Studies on the development of in vitro diagnostic tests, vaccines, and drug re-purposing are being carried out in this field. Currently, no approved treatment is available for SARS-CoV-2 given the lack of evidence. The results from preliminary clinical trials have been mixed as far as improvement in the clinical condition and reduction in the duration of treatment are concerned. A number of new clinical trials are currently in progress to test the efficacy and safety of various approved drugs. This review focuses on recent advancements in the field of development of diagnostic tests, vaccines, and treatment approaches for COVID-19.

The optimal diagnostic methods for COVID-19

As the world continues to study and understand coronavirus disease (COVID-19), existing investigations and tests have been used to try and detect the virus to slow viral transmission and its global spread. A ‘gold-standard’ investigation has not yet been identified for detection and monitoring. Initially, computed tomography (CT) was the mainstay investigation as it shows the disease severity and recovery, and its images change at different stages of the disease. However, CT has been found to have limited sensitivity and negative predictive value in the early stages of the disease, and the value of its use has come under debate due to whether its images change the treatment plan, the risk of radiation, as well as its practicality with infection control. Therefore, there has been a shift to the use of other imaging modalities and tests, such as chest X-rays and ultrasound. Furthermore, the use of nucleic acid-based testing such as reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have proven useful with direct confirmation of COVID-19 infection. In this study, we aim to review and analyse current literature to compare RT-PCR, immunological biomarkers, chest radiographs, ultrasound and chest CT scanning as methods of diagnosing COVID-19.

Clearance and persistence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in patients with COVID-19

Patients with coronavirus disease‐2019 may be discharged based on clinical resolution of symptoms, and evidence for viral RNA clearance from the upper respiratory tract. Understanding the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) viral clearance profile is crucial to establish a re‐testing plan on discharge and ending isolation of patients. We aimed to evaluate the number of days that a patient needed to achieve undetectable levels of SARS‐CoV‐2 in upper respiratory tract specimens (nasopharyngeal swab and/or an oropharyngeal swab). The clearance and persistence of viral RNA was evaluated in two groups of positive patients: those who achieved two negative reverse transcription‐polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) tests and those who kept testing positive. Patients were organized thereafter in two subgroups, mild illness patients discharged home and inpatients who had moderate to severe illness. Results from RT‐PCR tests were then correlated with results from the evaluation of the immune response. The study evidenced that most patients tested positive for more than 2 weeks and that persistence of viral RNA is not necessarily associated with severe disease but may result from a weaker immune response instead.

Viral RNA was evaluated in two groups of patients: those who achieved two negative RT‐PCR tests and those who kept testing positive.

Patients were organized thereafter in two subgroups, mild and moderate/severe illness patients.

Most patients from either group tested positive for more than two weeks.

Mild illness patients maintained viral RNA for a longer period of time and presented lower IgG titers than moderate/severe illness patients.

We hypothesize that the exposition of mild illness patients to SARS‐CoV‐2 did not elicit an effective immune response, explaining the need of more time to viral RNA clearance.

Detection of antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein in both serum and saliva enhances detection of infection

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.

Antibody seroconversion in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)

OBJECTIVES

Asymptomatic and symptomatic patients may transmit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but their clinical features and immune responses remain largely unclear. We aimed to characterise the clinical features and immune responses of asymptomatic and symptomatic patients infected with SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

We collected clinical, laboratory and epidemiological records of patients hospitalised in a coronavirus field hospital in Wuhan. We performed qualitative detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin M (IgM) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) using archived blood samples.

RESULTS

Of 214 patients with SARS-CoV-2, 26 (12%) were asymptomatic at hospital admission and during hospitalisation. Most asymptomatic patients were ≤ 60 years (96%) and females (65%) and had few comorbidities (< 16%). Serum levels of white and red blood cells were higher in asymptomatic than in symptomatic patients (P-values < 0.05). During hospitalisation, IgG seroconversion was commonly observed in both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients (85% versus 94%, P-value = 0.07); in contrast, IgM seroconversion was less common in asymptomatic than in symptomatic patients (31% versus 74%, P-value < 0.001). The median time from the first virus-positive screening to IgG or IgM seroconversion was significantly shorter in asymptomatic than in symptomatic patients (median: 7 versus 14 days, P-value < 0.01). Furthermore, IgG/IgM seroconversion rates increased concomitantly with the clearance of SARS-CoV-2 in both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients. At the time of virus clearance, IgG/IgM titres and plasma neutralisation capacity were significantly lower in recovered asymptomatic than in recovered symptomatic patients (P-values < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Asymptomatic and symptomatic patients exhibited different kinetics of IgG/IgM responses to SARS-CoV-2. Asymptomatic patients may transmit SARS-CoV-2, highlighting the importance of early diagnosis and treatment.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies in District Srinagar, northern India - A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Prevalence of IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 infection provides essential information for deciding disease prevention and mitigation measures. We estimate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies in District Srinagar.

METHODS

2906 persons >18 years of age selected from hospital visitors across District Srinagar participated in the study. We tested samples for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies using a chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay-based serologic test.

RESULTS

Age- and gender-standardized seroprevalence was 3.6% (95% CI 2.9% to 4.3%). Age 30-69 years, a recent history of symptoms of an influenza-like-illness, and a history of being placed under quarantine were significantly related to higher odds of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies. The estimated number of SARS-CoV-2 infections during the two weeks preceding the study, adjusted for test performance, was 32602 with an estimated (median) infection-to-known-case ratio of 46 (95% CI 36 to 57).

CONCLUSIONS

The seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies is low in the District. A large proportion of the population is still susceptible to the infection. A sizeable number of infections remain undetected, and a substantial proportion of people with symptoms compatible with COVID-19 are not tested.