Serology assays used in SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence surveys worldwide: a systematic review and meta-analysis of assay features, testing algorithms, and performance

Author:

Ma XiaomengORCID,Li ZihanORCID,Whelan Mairead G.ORCID,Kim DayoungORCID,Cao ChristianORCID,Yanes-Lane MercedesORCID,Yan TingtingORCID,Jaenisch Thomas,Chu MayORCID,Clifton David A.,Subissi LorenzoORCID,Bobrovitz NiklasORCID,Arora Rahul K.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundMany serological assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were developed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Differences in the detection mechanism of SARS-CoV-2 serological assays limited the comparability of seroprevalence estimates for populations being tested.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of serological assays used in SARS-CoV-2 population seroprevalence surveys, searching for published articles, preprints, institutional sources, and grey literature between January 1, 2020, and November 19, 2021. We described features of all identified assays and mapped performance metrics by the manufacturers, third-party head-to-head, and independent group evaluations. We compared the reported assay performance by evaluation source with a mixed-effect beta regression model. A simulation was run to quantify how biased assay performance affects population seroprevalence estimates with test adjustment.ResultsAmong 1807 included serosurveys, 192 distinctive commercial assays and 380 self-developed assays were identified. According to manufacturers, 28.6% of all commercial assays met WHO criteria for emergency use (sensitivity [Sn.] >= 90.0%, specificity [Sp.] >= 97.0%). However, manufacturers overstated the absolute values of Sn. of commercial assays by 1.0% [0.1, 1.4%] and 3.3% [2.7, 3.4%], and Sp. by 0.9% [0.9, 0.9%] and 0.2% [-0.1, 0.4%] compared to third-party and independent evaluations, respectively. Reported performance data was not sufficient to support a similar analysis for self-developed assays. Simulations indicate that inaccurate Sn. and Sp. can bias seroprevalence estimates adjusted for assay performance; the error level changes with the background seroprevalence.ConclusionsThe Sn. and Sp. of the serological assay are not fixed properties, but varying features depending on the testing population. To achieve precise population estimates and to ensure the comparability of seroprevalence, serosurveys should select assays with high performance validated not only by their manufacturers and adjust seroprevalence estimates based on assured performance data. More investigation should be directed to consolidating the performance of self-developed assays.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference39 articles.

1. Serology testing in the COVID-19 pandemic response

2. COVID-19 Serological Tests: How Well Do They Actually Perform?;Diagn. Basel Switz,2020

3. Makoah, N. A. ; Tipih, T. ; Litabe, M. M. ; Brink, M. ; Sempa, J. B. ; Goedhals, D. ; Burt, F. J. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Sensitivity of Antibody Tests for the Laboratory Confirmation of COVID-19. Future Virol., 2021. https://doi.org/10.2217/fvl-2021-0211.

4. NRL Science of Quality. WHO SARS-CoV-2 Test Kit Comparative Study.

5. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Independent Evaluations of COVID-19 Serological Tests.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3