Tracking SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity in rural communities using blood-fed mosquitoes: a proof-of-concept study

Background

The spread of SARS-CoV-2 cannot be well monitored and understood in areas without capacity for effective disease surveillance. Countries with a young population will have disproportionately large numbers of asymptomatic or pauci-symptomatic infections, further hindering detection of infection. Sero-surveillance on a country-wide scale by trained medical professionals may be limited in a resource-limited setting such as Mali. Novel ways of broadly sampling the human population in a non-invasive method would allow for large-scale surveillance at a reduced cost.

Approach

Here we evaluate the collection of naturally blood-fed mosquitoes to test for human anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the laboratory and at five field locations in Mali.

Results

Immunoglobulin-G antibodies to multiple SARS-CoV-2 antigens were readily detected in mosquito bloodmeals by bead-based immunoassay through at least 10 h after feeding [mean sensitivity of 0.92 (95% CI 0.78-1) and mean specificity of 0.98 (95% CI 0.88-1)], indicating that most blood-fed mosquitoes collected indoors during early morning hours (and likely to have fed the previous night) are viable samples for analysis. We found that reactivity to four SARS-CoV-2 antigens rose during the pandemic from pre-pandemic levels. The crude seropositivity of blood sampled via mosquitoes was 6.3% in October and November 2020 across all sites, and increased to 25.1% overall by February 2021, with the most urban site reaching 46.7%, consistent with independent venous blood-based sero-surveillance estimates.

Conclusions

We have demonstrated that using mosquito bloodmeals, country-wide sero-surveillance of human diseases (both vector-borne and non-vector-borne) is possible in areas where human-biting mosquitoes are common, offering an informative, cost-effective, and non-invasive sampling option.

Tracking SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity in rural communities using blood-fed mosquitoes

The spread of SARS-CoV-2 cannot be well monitored and understood in areas without capacity for effective disease surveillance. Countries with a young population will have disproportionately large numbers of asymptomatic or pauci-symptomatic infections, further hindering detection of infection in the population. Sero-surveillance on a country-wide scale by trained medical professionals may be limited in scope in resource limited setting such as Mali. Novel ways of broadly sampling the human population in a non-invasive method would allow for large-scale surveillance at a reduced cost. Here we evaluate the collection of naturally bloodfed mosquitoes to test for human anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the laboratory and at five field locations in Mali. Immunoglobulin-G antibodies were found to be readily detectable within the mosquito bloodmeals by a bead-based immunoassay at least through 10 hours post-feeding with high sensitivity (0.900 ± 0.059) and specificity (0.924 ± 0.080), respectively, indicating that most blood-fed mosquitoes collected indoors during early morning hours (and thus, have likely fed the previous night) are viable samples for analysis. We find that reactivity to four SARS-CoV-2 antigens rose during the pandemic from pre-pandemic levels. Consistent with other sero-surveillance studies in Mali, crude seropositivity of blood sampled via mosquitoes was 6.3% in October/November 2020 over all sites, and increased to 25.1% overall, with the town closest to Bamako reaching 46.7% in February of 2021. Mosquito bloodmeals a viable target for conventional immunoassays, and therefore country-wide sero-surveillance of human diseases (both vector-borne and non-vector-borne) is attainable in areas where human-biting mosquitoes are common, and is an informative, cost-effective, non-invasive sampling option.

Development and comparative evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD and N based ELISA tests in various African endemic settings

Management of the COVID-19 pandemic relies on molecular diagnostic methods supported by serological tools. Herein, we developed S-RBD- and N- based ELISA assays useful for infection rate surveillance as well as the follow-up of acquired protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2. ELISA assays were optimized using COVID-19 Tunisian patients' sera and prepandemic controls. Assays were further validated in 3 African countries with variable endemic settings. The receiver operating curve was used to evaluate the assay performances. The N- and S-RBD-based ELISA assays performances, in Tunisia, were very high (AUC: 0.966 and 0.98, respectively, p < 0.0001). Cross-validation analysis showed similar performances in different settings. Cross-reactivity, with malaria infection, against viral antigens, was noticed. In head-to-head comparisons with different commercial assays, the developed assays showed high agreement. This study demonstrates, the added value of the developed serological assays in low-income countries, particularly in ethnically diverse populations with variable exposure to local endemic infectious diseases.

Comparison of one single-antigen assay and three multi-antigen SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays in Nigeria

Objectives

Determining an accurate estimate of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence has been challenging in African countries where malaria and other pathogens are endemic. We compared the performance of one single-antigen assay and three multi-antigen SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays in a Nigerian population endemic for malaria.

Methods

De-identified plasma specimens from SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive, dried blood spot (DBS) SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive, and pre-pandemic negatives were used to evaluate the performance of the four SARS-CoV-2 assays (Tetracore, SARS2MBA, RightSign, xMAP).

Results

Results showed higher sensitivity with the multi-antigen (81% (Tetracore), 96% (SARS2MBA), 85% (xMAP)) versus the single-antigen (RightSign (64%)) SARS-CoV-2 assay. The overall specificities were 98% (Tetracore), 100% (SARS2MBA and RightSign), and 99% (xMAP). When stratified based on <15 days to ≥15 days post-RT-PCR confirmation, the sensitivities increased from 75% to 88.2% for Tetracore; from 93% to 100% for the SARS2MBA; from 58% to 73% for RightSign; and from 83% to 88% for xMAP. With DBS, there was no positive increase after 15-28 days for the three assays (Tetracore, SARS2MBA, and xMAP).

Conclusion

Multi-antigen assays performed well in Nigeria, even with samples with known malaria reactivity, and might provide more accurate measures of COVID-19 seroprevalence and vaccine efficacy.

Design of an observational multi-country cohort study to assess immunogenicity of multiple vaccine platforms (InVITE)

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 vaccines have been developed, and the World Health Oraganization (WHO) has granted emergency use listing to multiple vaccines. Studies of vaccine immunogenicity data from implementing COVID-19 vaccines by national immunization programs in single studies spanning multiple countries and continents are limited but critically needed to answer public health questions on vaccines, such as comparing immune responses to different vaccines and among different populations.

Recent malaria does not substantially impact COVID-19 antibody response or rates of symptomatic illness in communities with high malaria and COVID-19 transmission in Mali, West Africa

Malaria has been hypothesized as a factor that may have reduced the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa. To evaluate the effect of recent malaria on COVID-19 we assessed a subgroup of individuals participating in a longitudinal cohort COVID-19 serosurvey that were also undergoing intensive malaria monitoring as part of antimalarial vaccine trials during the 2020 transmission season in Mali. These communities experienced a high incidence of primarily asymptomatic or mild COVID-19 during 2020 and 2021. In 1314 individuals, 711 were parasitemic during the 2020 malaria transmission season; 442 were symptomatic with clinical malaria and 269 had asymptomatic infection. Presence of parasitemia was not associated with new COVID-19 seroconversion (29.7% (211/711) vs. 30.0% (181/603), p=0.9038) or with rates of reported symptomatic seroconversion during the malaria transmission season. In the subsequent dry season, prior parasitemia was not associated with new COVID-19 seroconversion (30.2% (133/441) vs. 31.2% (108/346), p=0.7499), with symptomatic seroconversion, or with reversion from seropositive to seronegative (prior parasitemia: 36.2% (64/177) vs. no parasitemia: 30.1% (37/119), p=0.3842). After excluding participants with asymptomatic infection, clinical malaria was also not associated with COVID-19 serostatus or symptomatic seroconversion when compared to participants with no parasitemia during the monitoring period. In communities with intense seasonal malaria and a high incidence of asymptomatic or mild COVID-19, we did not demonstrate a relationship between recent malaria and subsequent response to COVID-19. Lifetime exposure, rather than recent infection, may be responsible for any effect of malaria on COVID-19 severity.