SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence after the first wave among workers at a community healthcare system in the Greater Boston area

A study of the evolution of the third COVID-19 pandemic wave in the Athens metropolitan area, Greece, through two cross-sectional seroepidemiological surveys: March, June 2021

We studied the third coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic wave in Athens metropolitan area (3 738 901 inhabitants) through two seroepidemiological surveys. Persons presenting in 12 healthcare facilities across Athens in March and June 2021 were studied (764 and 901, respectively). Immunoglobulin G antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) spike protein were measured by a chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay. In March the seroprevalence rate was 11.6%, meaning that 435 208 residents of Athens had evidence of immunity. The respective values in June were 55.7% and 2 082 568 residents. The highest seroprevalence rates attributed to SARS‐CoV‐2 infection were recorded in persons <18 years (16.3% in March and 31.6% in June), while immunity was mainly vaccine‐induced in persons 18–64 years and >65 years. Infection‐attributed immunity also increased in older‐age groups. Wide ranges in seroprevalence rates were noted across areas in March and June. The highest seroprevalence rates were recorded in Piraeus (47.2%) and West Attica (37.5%). However, the highest increase (>5 times) occurred in Piraeus and the South Section of Athens, which are among the most densely populated areas in Athens. In both study periods, history of COVID‐19 or febrile episode, and having a cohabitant with COVID‐19 were associated with increased risk for seropositivity among unvaccinated persons (p values <0.001 for all). Residing in Piraeus, the South Section or West Attica was associated with increased risk for seropositivity in June (p values <0.001). Wide heterogeneity in seroprevalence rates was found across areas in Athens, which is mainly attributed to population density. The impact of population mobility and socioeconomic status should be explored.

Impact of Two Different Recruitment Procedures (Random vs. Volunteer Selection) on the Results of Seroepidemiological Study (SARS-CoV-2)

The proper recruitment of subjects for population-based epidemiological studies is critical to the external validity of the studies and, above all, to the sound and correct interpretation of the findings. Since 2020, the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has been a new factor that has been, additionally, hindering studies. Therefore, the aim of our study is to compare demographic, socio-economic, health-related characteristics and the frequency of SARS-CoV-2 infection occurrence among the randomly selected group and the group composed of volunteers. We compare two groups of participants from the cross-sectional study assessing the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, which was conducted in autumn 2020, in three cities of the Silesian Voivodeship in Poland. The first group consisted of a randomly selected, nationally representative, age-stratified sample of subjects (1167 participants, “RG” group) and was recruited using personal invitation letters and postal addresses obtained from a national registry. The second group (4321 volunteers, “VG” group) included those who expressed their willingness to participate in response to an advertisement published in the media. Compared with RG subjects, volunteers were more often females, younger and professionally active, more often had a history of contact with a COVID-19 patient, post-contact nasopharyngeal swab, fewer comorbidities, as well as declared the occurrence of symptoms that might suggest infection with SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, in the VG group the percentage of positive IgG results and tuberculosis vaccination were higher. The findings of the study confirm that surveys limited to volunteers are biased. The presence of the bias may seriously affect and distort inference and make the generalizability of the results more than questionable. Although effective control over selection bias in surveys, including volunteers, is virtually impossible, its impact on the survey results is impossible to predict. However, whenever possible, such surveys could include a small component of a random sample to assess the presence and potential effects of selection bias.

Prevalence, Persistence, and Factors Associated with SARS-CoV-2 IgG Seropositivity in a Large Cohort of Healthcare Workers in a Tertiary Care University Hospital in Northern Italy

This observational study evaluated SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroprevalence and related clinical, demographic, and occupational factors among workers at the largest tertiary care University-Hospital of Northwestern Italy and the University of Turin after the first pandemic wave of March–April 2020. Overall, about 10,000 individuals were tested; seropositive subjects were retested after 5 months to evaluate antibodies waning. Among 8769 hospital workers, seroprevalence was 7.6%, without significant differences related to job profile; among 1185 University workers, 3.3%. Self-reporting of COVID-19 suspected symptoms was significantly associated with positivity (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.07, 95%CI: 1.76–2.44), although 27% of seropositive subjects reported no previous symptom. At multivariable analysis, contacts at work resulted in an increased risk of 69%, or 24% for working in a COVID ward; contacts in the household evidenced the highest risk, up to more than five-fold (OR 5.31, 95%CI: 4.12–6.85). Compared to never smokers, being active smokers was inversely associated with seroprevalence (OR 0.60, 95%CI: 0.48–0.76). After 5 months, 85% of previously positive subjects still tested positive. The frequency of SARS-COV-2 infection among Health Care Workers was comparable with that observed in surveys performed in Northern Italy and Europe after the first pandemic wave. This study confirms that infection frequently occurred as asymptomatic and underlines the importance of household exposure, seroprevalence (OR 0.60, 95%CI: 0.48–0.76).