RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Specificity of SARS-CoV-2 antibody-detection assays against S and N protein among pre-COVID-19 sera from patients with protozoan and helminth parasitic infections
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.08.10.21261841
DO 10.1101/2021.08.10.21261841
A1 Cedric P Yansouni
A1 Jesse Papenburg
A1 Matthew P. Cheng
A1 Rachel Corsini
A1 Chelsea Caya
A1 Fabio Vasquez Camargo
A1 Luke B Harrison
A1 Gerasimos Zaharatos
A1 Philippe Büscher
A1 Babacar Faye
A1 Magatte Ndiaye
A1 Greg Matlashewski
A1 Momar Ndao
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/08/12/2021.08.10.21261841.abstract
AB Background We aimed to assess the specificity of SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection assays among people with known tissue-borne parasitic infections.Methods We tested three SARS-CoV-2 antibody-detection assays (cPass SARS-CoV-2 Neutralization Antibody Detection Kit, Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay, and STANDARD Q COVID-19 IgM/IgG Combo Rapid Test) among 559 pre-COVID-19 sera.Results The specificity of assays was 95-98% overall. However, lower specificity was observed among sera from patients with protozoan infections of the reticuloendothelial system, such as human African trypanosomiasis (Abbott Architect; 88% [95%CI 75-95]), visceral leishmaniasis (SD RDT IgG; 80% [95%CI 30-99]), and from patients with recent malaria from a holoendemic area of Senegal (ranging from 91% for Abbott Architect and SD RDT IgM to 98-99% for cPass and SD RDT IgG). For specimens from patients with evidence of past or present helminth infection overall, test specificity estimates were all ≥ 96%. Sera collected from patients clinically suspected of parasitic infections that tested negative for these infections yielded a specificity of 98-100%. The majority (>85%) of false-positive results were positive by only one assay.Conclusions The specificity of SARS-CoV-2 serological assays among sera from patients with tissue-borne parasitic infections was below the threshold required for decisions about individual patient care. Specificity is markedly increased by the use of confirmatory testing with a second assay. Finally, the SD RDT IgG proved similarly specific to laboratory-based assays and provides an option in low-resource settings when detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG is indicated.Competing Interest StatementJP reports grants from MedImmune, grants from Sanofi Pasteur, grants and personal fees from Seegene, grants and personal fees from AbbVie, outside the submitted work. MPC reports personal fees from GEn1E Lifesciences (as a member of the scientific advisory board), personal fees from nplex biosciences (as a member of the scientific advisory board), outside the submitted work. He is the co-founder of Kanvas Biosciences and owns equity in the company. In addition, MPC has a patent Methods for detecting tissue damage, graft versus host disease, and infections using cell-free DNA profiling pending, and a patent Methods for assessing the severity and progression of SARS-CoV-2 infections using cell-free DNA pending. CPY reports being on an Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC) for Medicago Inc. All other authors report no conflicts of interest.Funding StatementThis work was funded by a grant from the McGill Interdisciplinary Initiative in Infection and Immunity (MI4); https://www.mcgill.ca/mi4/. C.P.Y and J.P. hold a Chercheur-boursier clinicien career award from the Fonds de recherche du Québec - Santé (FRQS). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.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:This work was approved by the Research Ethics Boards of the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre (RI-MUHC # 2021-7246).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.YesAfter peer-reviewed publication, data available on request in the setting of a suitable research protocol.