%0 Journal Article %A Katherine Bond %A Suellen Nicholson %A Seok Ming Lim %A Theo Karapanagiotidis %A Eloise Williams %A Douglas Johnson %A Tuyet Hoang %A Cheryll Sia %A Damian Purcell %A Sharon R Lewin %A Mike Catton %A Benjamin P Howden %A Deborah A Williamson %T Evaluation of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2: Implications for serology testing in a low-prevalence setting %D 2020 %R 10.1101/2020.05.31.20118273 %J medRxiv %P 2020.05.31.20118273 %X Background Robust serological assays are essential for long-term control of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many recently released point-of-care (PoCT) serological assays have been distributed with little pre-market validation.Methods Performance characteristics for five PoCT lateral flow devices approved for use in Australia were compared to a commercial enzyme immunoassay (ELISA) and a recently described novel surrogate virus neutralisation test (sVNT).Results Sensitivities for PoCT ranged from 51.8% (95% CI 43.1 to 60.4%) to 67.9% (95% CI 59.4–75.6%), and specificities from 95.6% (95% CI 89.2–98.8%) to 100.0% (95% CI 96.1–100.0%). Overall ELISA sensitivity for either IgA or IgG detection was 67.9% (95% CI 59.4–75.6), increasing to 93.8% (95% CI 85.0–98.3%) for samples > 14 days post symptom onset. Overall, sVNT sensitivity was 60.9% (95% CI 53.2–68.4%), rising to 91.2%% (95% CI 81.8–96.7%) for samples collected > 14 days post-symptom onset, with a specificity 94.4% (95% CI 89.2–97.5%),Conclusion Performance characteristics for COVID-19 serological assays were generally lower than those reported by manufacturers. Timing of specimen collection relative to onset of illness or infection is crucial in the reporting of performance characteristics for COVID-19 serological assays. The optimal algorithm for implementing serological testing for COVID-19 remains to be determined, particularly in low-prevalence settings.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementDAW is supported by an Investigator Grant from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia (APP1174555). BPH is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (APP1105905). KB is supported by an NHMRC Postgraduate Scholarship (GNT1191321). This work was supported by a grant from the NHMRC Medical Research Future Fund (APP2002317).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:Ethical approval for this project was obtained from the Melbourne Health Human Research Ethics Committee (RMH HREC QA2020052).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.YesWe have included all relevant data. %U https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/06/03/2020.05.31.20118273.full.pdf