TY - JOUR T1 - Use of dried blood spot samples for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection using the Roche Elecsys ® high throughput immunoassay JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.10.19.20215228 SP - 2020.10.19.20215228 AU - Ranya Mulchandani AU - Ben Brown AU - Tim Brooks AU - Amanda Semper AU - Nicholas Machin AU - Ezra Linley AU - Ray Borrow AU - EDSAB-HOME Study Investigators AU - David Wyllie Y1 - 2020/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/21/2020.10.19.20215228.abstract N2 - Background Dried blood spot samples (DBS) provide an alternative sample type to venous blood samples for antibody testing. DBS are used by NHS for diagnosing HCV and by PHE for large scale HIV and Hepatitis C serosurveillance; the applicability of DBS based approaches to SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection is uncertain.Objective To compare antibody detection in dried blood spot eluates using the Roche Elecsys ® immunoassay (index test) with antibody detection in paired plasma samples, using the same assay (reference test).Setting One Police and one Fire & Rescue facility in England.Participants 195 participants within a larger sample COVID-19 serodiagnostics study of keyworkers, EDSAB-HOME.Outcome Measures Sensitivity and specificity of DBS (the index test) relative to plasma (the reference test), at an experimental cut-off; quality of DBS sample collected; estimates of relative sensitivity of DBS vs. plasma immunoassay in a larger population.Results 18/195 (9.2%) participants tested positive using plasma samples. DBS sample quality varied markedly by phlebotomist, and low sample volume significantly reduced immunoassay signals. Using a cut-off of ten median absolute deviations above the immunoassay result with negative samples, sensitivity and specificity of DBS were 89.0% (95% CI 67.2, 96.9%) and 100.0% (95% CI 97.9, 100%) respectively compared with using plasma. The limit of detection for DBS is about 30 times higher than for plasma.Conclusion DBS use for SARS-CoV-2 serology, though feasible, is insensitive relative to immunoassays on plasma. Sample quality impacts on assay performance. Alternatives, including the collection of capillary blood samples, should be considered for screening programs.Competing Interest StatementEL & RB perform contract research on behalf of PHE for GSK, Pfizer and Sanofi Pasteur. No other authors have any conflicts of interest to declare.Clinical Protocols http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN56609224. Funding StatementPublic Health England.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:EDSAB-HOME study was approved by NHS Research Ethics Committee (Health Research Authority, IRAS 284980) on 02/06/2020 and PHE Research Ethics and Governance Group (REGG, NR0198) on 21/05/2020.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesData can be made available on reasonable request via Public Health England's Office of Data Release. ER -