TY - JOUR T1 - Probabilistic approaches for classifying highly variable anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.07.17.20155937 SP - 2020.07.17.20155937 AU - Xaquin C Dopico AU - Leo Hanke AU - Daniel J. Sheward AU - Sandra Muschiol AU - Soo Aleman AU - Nastasiya F. Grinberg AU - Monika Adori AU - Murray Christian AU - Laura Perez Vidakovics AU - Changil Kim AU - Sharesta Khoenkhoen AU - Pradeepa Pushparaj AU - Ainhoa Moliner Morro AU - Marco Mandolesi AU - Marcus Ahl AU - Mattias Forsell AU - Jonathan Coquet AU - Martin Corcoran AU - Joanna Rorbach AU - Joakim Dillner AU - Gordana Bogdanovic AU - Gerald M. McInerney AU - Tobias Allander AU - Ben Murrell AU - Chris Wallace AU - Jan Albert AU - Gunilla B. Karlsson Hedestam Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/01/06/2020.07.17.20155937.abstract N2 - Antibody responses vary widely between individuals1, complicating the correct classification of low-titer measurements using conventional assay cut-offs. We found all participants in a clinically diverse cohort of SARS-CoV-2 PCR+ individuals (n=105) – and n=33 PCR+ hospital staff – to have detectable IgG specific for pre-fusion-stabilized spike (S) glycoprotein trimers, while 98% of persons had IgG specific for the receptor-binding domain (RBD). However, anti-viral IgG levels differed by several orders of magnitude between individuals and were associated with disease severity, with critically ill patients displaying the highest anti-viral antibody titers and strongest in vitro neutralizing responses. Parallel analysis of random healthy blood donors and pregnant women (n=1,000) of unknown serostatus, further demonstrated highly variable IgG titers amongst seroconverters, although these were generally lower than in hospitalized patients and included several measurements that scored between the classical 3 and 6SD assay cut-offs. Since the correct classification of seropositivity is critical for individual- and population-level metrics, we compared different probabilistic algorithms for their ability to assign likelihood of past infection. To do this, we used tandem anti-S and -RBD IgG responses from our PCR+ individuals (n=138) and a large cohort of historical negative controls (n=595) as training data, and generated an equal-weighted learner from the output of support vector machines and linear discriminant analysis. Applied to test samples, this approach provided a more quantitative way to interpret anti-viral titers over a large continuum, scrutinizing measurements overlapping the negative control background more closely and offering a probability-based diagnosis with potential clinical utility. Especially as most SARS-CoV-2 infections result in asymptomatic or mild disease, these platform-independent approaches improve individual and epidemiological estimates of seropositivity, critical for effective management of the pandemic and monitoring the response to vaccination.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementFunding for this work was provided by a Distinguished Professor grant from the Swedish Research Council (agreement 532 2017-00968) and NIH (agreement SUM1A44462-02). CW and NFG are funded by the Wellcome Trust (WT107881) and MRC (MC_UP_1302/5)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:Swedish Ethical Review Authority (registration no. 2020-01807).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 generated as part of the study, along with custom code for statistical analyses, is openly available via our GitHub repositories: https://github.com/MurrellGroup/DiscriminativeSeroprevalence/ and https://github.com/chr1swallace/seroprevalence-paper. ER -