ABSTRACT
The extent of SARS-CoV-2 infection throughout the United States population is currently unknown. High quality serology is a key tool to understanding the spread of infection, immunity against the virus, and correlates of protection. Limited validation and testing of serology assays used for serosurveys can lead to unreliable or misleading data, and clinical testing using such unvalidated assays can lead to medically costly diagnostic errors and improperly informed public health decisions. Estimating prevalence and clinical decision making is highly dependent on specificity. Here, we present an optimized ELISA-based serology protocol from antigen production to data analysis. This protocol defines thresholds for IgG and IgM for determination of seropositivity with estimated specificity well above 99%. Validation was performed using both traditionally collected serum and dried blood on mail-in blood sampling kits, using archival (pre-2019) negative controls and known PCR-diagnosed positive patient controls. Minimal cross-reactivity was observed for the spike proteins of MERS, SARS1, OC43 and HKU1 viruses and no cross reactivity was observed with anti-influenza A H1N1 HAI titer during validation. This strategy is highly specific and is designed to provide good estimates of seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity in a population, providing specific and reliable data from serosurveys and clinical testing which can be used to better evaluate and understand SARS-CoV-2 immunity and correlates of protection.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research was supported in part by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, including the National Institute for Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. This project has been funded in part with Federal funds from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, under contract number HHSN261200800001E. Disclaimer: The NIH, its officers, and employees do no recommend or endorse any company, product, or service.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The negative controls were collected under an approved NIH protocol listed on ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01386424. All other samples used were uncoded, deidentified samples collected with local IRB approval and determined to be IRB exempt by the NIH IRB for us to receive and use for this analysis
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data contained in this manuscript will be available at request after formal publication of the manuscript in a peer-reviewed journal.
