key: cord-1009113-cq5ox6aq
authors: Fernández-Barat, Laia; López-Aladid, Ruben; Torres, Antoni
title: The value of serology testing to manage SARS-CoV-2 infections
date: 2020-07-16
journal: Eur Respir J
DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02411-2020
sha: f0b241c9edc9b0a099e376417fd560bbd253e548
doc_id: 1009113
cord_uid: cq5ox6aq

The figures presented in the World Health Organisation's latest report on the current status of the COVID-19 pandemic and the COVID-19 dashboard of the Johns Hopkins University of Medicine are quite similar: respectively, 6,416,828 and 6,656,827 cases worldwide, and 382 867 and 391 571 deaths [1, 2].

The evidence shows that virus transmission can occur during the incubation period, which is officially estimated to be between 2 and 14 days (6, 7) . However, a case with an incubation period of 27 days was reported on 22 February by the local government of Hubei province, and high sputum viral loads were found during the recovery phase in a patient with pneumonia caused by COVID-19 (8) .

The range of rapid diagnostic methods available to control the pandemic is growing. However, their usefulness remains questionable, given the lack of official validation of their performance in terms of sensitivity and specificity: only a limited number of assays have received emergency use authorization from U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (9) .

Rapid PCR tests to diagnose the disease and to avoid its spread, and serological assays to determine the production of antibodies, are two important tools in managing this pandemic. Unfortunately, the sensitivity of PCR methods is no higher than 70%, which may potentially lead to underdiagnosis of COVID-19 especially in the less severe or asymptomatic cases. Serological tests are fundamental to determine the acquired immunity of patients who have had the disease and to establish the level of immunization in the general population.

Serology assays overcome two important limitations of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-based techniques. The first is that they can be manipulated in a biosafety level 2 laboratory, whereas the detection of viral load requires a biosafety level 3 environment, in addition to higher protection measures during sample procurement. Secondly, sampling issues are less important in serology assays. Finally, in SARS-CoV-2 PCR-based techniques, the type of respiratory specimen and the sampling method may have a strong influence on the test's sensitivity.

In this issue, Bin Lou et al. present interesting data on SARS-CoV-2 assessed using PCR and on seroconversion dynamics in a cohort of 80 patients from the Hospital of Zhejiang in China. The authors measured cumulative levels of antibodies (Ab), IgM and IgG at different time points ranging from five to 30 days since the onset of symptoms or since exposure (in only 45 patients). The fact that three different serology assays were used (two in the case of IgG) and the study of the seroconversion dynamics after the onset (0-7, 8-14 or 15-29 days) offer an interesting picture of immune response to SARS-CoV-2, clustered according to short vs long incubation periods and the development of critical vs non-critical illness. Critically ill versus non-critically ill patients did not differ with regard to time to seroconversion after exposure. The seroconversion time correlated inversely with the incubation period.

Using deep sputum instead of swabs, Bin Lou et al. found the highest sensitivity of ELISA in the 15-29 days period for Ab (100%), IgM (97%) and IgG (93%). Overall these results indicate that viral load decreased as antibody response was enhanced. Indeed, these authors found that the RNA test sensitivity was very high (100%) during the first seven days of onset but decreased at 8-14 days (to 90%) and at 15-29 days (to 70%). Similar findings by other authors suggest that monitoring the dynamics of COVID infection combining serological tests and high throughput assays would be better than using the RNA test alone (10).

Thus, serology tests seem more useful for studying seroconversion dynamics and for providing relevant epidemiological data during the mid-long term of the disease course rather than at early stages. The cumulative seroconversion showed that Ab, IgM and IgG reached 100% at 15, 18 and 20 days post exposure or 16, 21 and 29 days after onset of symptoms respectively. Since the quarantine period is established at 14 days, Bin Lou et al. suggest that serology tests could be performed before and after de-isolation to monitor antibodies and reduce the risk of spread.

Nevertheless, Bin Lou et al.'s data are representative of hospitalized patients and include not levels of antibodies but the cumulative seroconversion dynamics. Yong et al. reported three clusters of COVID-19 identified in Singapore by active case finding and confirmed by RT-PCR: a member of church A met a member of church B at a family gathering and SARS-CoV2 was spread by community transmission (11) . This study suggested that serological testing can play a crucial role in identifying convalescent cases or people with milder disease who might have been missed by other surveillance methods. However, there is a need for more extensive studies in non-hospitalized patients. From the information provided up to now it remains unclear whether a negative serological test (IgG) reflects a lack of active immune response or is a false negative.

High-sensitivity serology assays may be useful for the rapid identification of a large number of infected patients and asymptomatic carriers and for preventing virus transmission and ensuring timely treatment of patients (12) . However, in a study quantifying antibodies against the new coronavirus by luminex in health workers García-Basteiro et al. obtained a higher dynamic range with a specificity of 100% in IgM, IgG and RBD and a sensitivity of 97% in both Igs (13) . Interestingly, they reported that asymptomatic patients had lower levels of antibodies than mild-severe cases. In addition, in agreement with Bin Lou et al., they found that seroconversion occurred between two and three weeks after symptom onset.

Serology testing is a useful tool which may have several more applications in the future. Serology tests can be useful for complementing RNA tests, for the rapid identification of cases and for recommending quarantine or defining clusters. It is also a good method for containing and identifying the route of transmission in order to control the spread of the pandemic and to facilitate epidemiological studies. Serology assay may be useful to check immune status after vaccination. Finally, serology tests can identify plasma donors for therapeutic approaches involving plasmapheresis. Their usefulness in asymptomatic and mild patients remains unclear, because several studies report that these patients present the lowest levels of antibodies. Further studies are now required to determine the dynamics of antibody levels in severe COVID-19 presentation, its complications, and its associated mortality. Finally, there is still a need to establish the levels of antibodies that confer protection against reinfection, and also how long this protection may last.

WHO. Coronavirus disease (COVID-2019) situation reports

COVID-19 dashboard by the Center for Systems

Evolutionary history, potential intermediate animal host, and cross-species analyses of SARS-CoV-2

Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan

Clinical course and outcomes of critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a single-centered, retrospective, observational study

Radiological findings from 81 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. The Lancet Infectious diseases

Staff safety during emergency airway management for COVID-19 in Hong Kong

Longer incubation period of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in older adults: Aging Med (Milton)

Serology assays to manage COVID-19

Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel coronavirus disease 2019

Connecting clusters of COVID-19: an epidemiological and serological investigation. The Lancet Infectious diseases

Development and clinical application of a rapid IgM-IgG combined antibody test for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis

Alfredo Mayor, Carlota Dobano. Seroprevalence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 among health care workers in a large Spanish reference hospital