SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and neutralizing activity in donor and patient blood from the San Francisco Bay Area

Performance Characteristics of the Abbott Architect IgG and IgM SARS-CoV-2 Assays

We first assessed the performance of the Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG (FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA)) and IgM (prototype) assays from a cohort of five outpatients and 38 hospitalized patients at University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Medical Center and the San Francisco Veterans Affairs (SFVA) Health Care System. These assays are chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassays that target the nucleocapsid and spike proteins, respectively. All patients received care at adult inpatient units or clinics and were RT-PCR positive for SARS-CoV-2 from nasopharyngeal and/or oropharyngeal swab testing (Figure 1A, Table S1). The percentage of patients seroconverting for IgG at weekly time intervals following reported symptom onset reached 94.4% at ≥22 days (Figure 1B). Correspondingly, IgG assay sensitivity from analysis of all 423 samples increased weekly to reach 96.9% at ≥22 days, and was 99% when samples from seven immunocompromised patients (see below) were excluded (Figure 1D, Table 1). The percentage of patients seroconverting for IgM was also 94.4% at ≥22 days (Figure 1E) and IgM assay sensitivity from analysis of 346 samples was 97.9% (98.9% with immunocompromised patients excluded) (Figure 1G, Table 1).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1: Seroprevalence of Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2

(A) Schematic of testing performed and location of patient populations assessed. (B) IgG S/C ratios for SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive patient samples for the indicated weekly timeframes post-onset of symptoms (if multiple samples per patient were collected, the sample with the highest S/C value within each time frame is plotted). The percent of patients with positive antibody responses measured within each timeframe is indicated below the graphs. (C) IgG S/C ratios measured in pre-COVID samples; specificity and number of samples is indicated on graph. (D) Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for IgG levels for all samples from SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive patients within the indicated weekly time frames. AUCs for are 0.537 (day 1-7), 0.827 (day 8-14), 0.946 (day 15-21), 0.990 (day 22+). (E) IgM S/C ratios, as in (B). (F) IgM S/C ratios measured in pre-COVID samples. (G) ROC curves for IgM levels, as in (D); AUCs are 0.720 (day 0-7), 0.955 (day 8-14), 0.970 (day 15-21), 0.999 (day 22+). IgG (H) and IgM (I) S/C ratios were determined for hospitalized patients and outpatients and blood donors on whom SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing was positive or negative or was not performed. Numbers of seroreactive and total individuals tested are shown in tables below the graphs. The circled data points in (H) were additionally tested by the VITROS and neutralization assays. For patients with multiple samples, the single highest S/C value is plotted. In (B), (C), and (H), the dotted line at 1.4 indicates cutoff for IgG positivity; in (E), (F), and (I), the dotted line at 0.6 indicates cutoff for IgM positivity; data points in black and gray are above and below the indicated cutoffs, respectively.

Of the four patients who had not seroconverted for IgG by the end of 14 days (Figure 1B), two were kidney transplant recipients on tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) immunosuppressive therapy; one was >90 years old; and one was an asymptomatic patient receiving acute psychiatric care who provided an unreliable history. Both renal transplant recipients were observed to ultimately seroconvert for IgG and IgM. Notably, delayed seroconversion for IgG and IgM was not universal in immunosuppressed patients: three additional solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients on tacrolimus and MMF, as well as one patient with rheumatoid arthritis on methotrexate and infliximab, all seroconverted within two weeks. A further SOT recipient was positive for IgG and IgM in the earliest available serum sample from day 17 post symptom onset (Figure 2D, E). We did not have samples beyond day 18 for the remaining two patients. However, as seroconversion was observed as late as three weeks after symptom onset (Figure 2D, E), it is possible that analysis of later samples would have demonstrated detectable antibodies in their serum. The one patient who was still IgG negative in the 22+ day time frame (Figure 1B) (from a plasma sample collected on day 29) had only mild symptoms and was positive by IgM and neutralizing antibody testing (described below). Conversely, the one patient who was IgM negative in the 22+ day time frame was both IgG and neutralizing antibody positive from a plasma sample collected on day 50 (Figure 1E), by whichh time IgM antibody titers may have waned significantly.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2: Longitudinal dynamics and in vitro neutralizing activity of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2

(A) IgG and IgM levels for SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive matched patient samples. Percent of data points in each quadrant and positive percent agreement (PPA), negative percent agreement (NPA), and overall percent agreement (OPA) between IgG and IgM are shown. 80% neutralization titers (NT80) plotted against IgM (B) and IgG (C) S/C values. The cutoff for NT80 was a titer level of >40; negative results are non-numeric (<40) and are plotted at 35 for visualization purposes. (D-F), IgM (D) and IgG (E) S/C ratios and NT80 titers (F) for SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive patients were plotted against day post symptom onset. Immunocompromised patients are shown in blue. In (D, E), for patients with multiple same-day samples, the sample with the highest S/C value is plotted. (G) For the 6 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive patients whose IgM, IgG, and NT80 seroconversion events were captured during serial sampling, the days post-symptom onset seroconversion events are compared. (H) NT80 activity was evaluated per patient for the indicated time frames post onset of symptoms. The percent of patients with detectable NT80 activity measured within each time frame is indicated below the graphs. If multiple samples per patient were collected, the sample with the highest NT80 value within each time frame was used. (I) The average NT80 activity (right axis) and IgG and IgM (left axis) levels are plotted by day post-symptom onset (left); corresponding graphs for individual patients are shown in a 3×3 grid (right). If multiple samples per patient were collected, the sample with the highest S/C or NT80 value per time frame was used.

To evaluate assay specificity, serum and plasma samples collected by Abbott Laboratories from US blood donors prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (pre-COVID-19) were tested for IgG (n=1,013) and IgM (n=1,492) seroreactivity. Two samples out of 1,013 were positive by IgG testing, yielding a specificity of 99.8% (95% CI: 99.3-100%) (Figure 1C), concordant with the 99.9% specificity reported in a study by the University of Washington^4,5. Similarly, testing of 235 remnant plasma samples from 163 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative UCSF patients collected from late March to early April 2020 resulted in detection of only one positive sample, yielding a specificity of 99.6% (95% CI: 97.7-100%) (Figure 1H). The IgG positive sample was from a patient admitted for syncope but who reported a cough of one-month duration, suggesting a potential prior infection with SARS-CoV-2. Six samples out of 1,492 from US blood donors were positive by IgM testing, yielding a specificity of 99.6% (95% CI: 99.2-99.9%) (Figure 1F). This was consistent with more limited testing of 39 SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative UCSF patients, none of whom were positive for IgM antibody (Figure 1I). Thus, the Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM assays demonstrated high sensitivity (96.9%-97.9% at ≥22 days in a primarily hospitalized patient cohort) and specificity (99.6-99.8% in pre-COVID blood donors), with good correlation (rho = 0.65) between IgG anti-nucleocapsid protein and IgM anti-spike protein seropositivity (Figure 2A).

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in blood donors and patients from the San Francisco Bay Area in March 2020

Next, to investigate SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in the San Francisco Bay Area, we collected plasma and serum samples from two cohorts of individuals with low suspicion of infection from COVID-19. One cohort consisted of 1,000 individuals who donated blood in March 2020 at blood bank centers throughout the Bay Area (Figure 1A, Table S2). Routine blood donor screening was performed to exclude those with self-reported symptoms of acute illness and abnormal vital signs. We detected four IgG positive samples in this cohort, yielding a seroreactivity rate of 0.40% (Figure 1H). This cohort was not tested for IgM antibody. We then analyzed the four samples using two orthogonal tests, the VITROS anti-SARS-CoV-2 total antibody assay (Ortho Clinical Diagnostics EUA) and a SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralization assay (described below). Three of four samples were negative by both the VITROS and neutralization assays, and thus were designated likely false positives by the Architect IgG assay. Thus, the calculated seroprevalence after confirmatory orthogonal testing for Bay Area blood donors in March 2020 was 0.1% (95% CI: 0.00% - 0.56%). The false positive rate in this population of 0.3% is consistent with with the reported specificity of the Architect SARS-CoV-IgG test of 99.6%⁴.

The other cohort for evaluating seroprevalence represented a cross-section of patients who received care at adult inpatient units or clinics at the UCSF Medical Center for indications other than COVID-19 respiratory disease (non-COVID-19, never tested for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR) from late March to early April 2020. Remnant samples from 532 blood draws taken from these 387 patients were obtained from UCSF clinical laboratories. Of these 532 samples, five were positive for IgG; strikingly, all five of these samples were from the same patient who had respiratory failure and ground-glass opacities on chest imaging but was never tested for SARS-2-CoV by RT-PCR (Figure 1H). IgG seroprevalence in this population was thus 0.26% (95% CI: 0-0.76%). Although only 23 of the 532 remnant samples were able to be subsequently tested for IgM antibodies, importantly, none were positive (Figure 1I).

Longitudinal dynamics of immunoglobulin and neutralizing antibody titers in SARS-CoV-2 infected patient

We next analyzed the longitudinal dynamics of plasma IgG (286 samples) and IgM (249 samples) levels in our cohort of 43 patients who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR. As previously reported, IgG and IgM antibody levels were observed to rise approximately in tandem (Figure 2D, E)^6–10. We correlated median IgG, IgM, and neutralizing antibody (described below) levels at the weekly time intervals with severity of disease, and the differences were not statistically significant.

Lastly, we sought to correlate IgG and IgM seropositivity with SARS-CoV-2 in vitro neutralizing activity against a SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus (a vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) pseudotype expressing the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein). Plasma titers that achieved 80% neutralization of pseudovirus infectivity (NT80) were measured by luciferase assay (see Methods). We compared NT80 with IgG and IgM measurements in 54 available plasma samples from 22 of the 43 SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive patients (Figure 2B, C). The positive percent agreement (PPA) between NT80 and IgG positivity was 93.8% and the negative percent agreement (NPA) was 75.0% (Figure 2C). Results from the NT80 and IgM comparison were similar, with a PPA of 84.8% and NPA of 78.6% (Figure 2B). Importantly, neutralizing titers appeared concomitantly in plasma with IgG and IgM positivity (Figure 2D-G), correlated well with IgG (rho = 0.79) and IgM (rho = 0.77) levels, and increased over time in parallel with the rise of anti-spike IgM and ant-nucleocapsid IgG antibodies (Figure 2H-I).

Conclusions

In this study, we provide evidence that seropositive results using the Architect SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid protein IgG and anti-spike IgM assays are generally predictive of in vitro neutralizing capacity. This correlation may have particular relevance for recovered COVID-19 patients and the identification of candidate donors to provide blood for convalescent plasma therapy. However, in vitro neutralization activity may not confer protective immunity and the efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy for treatment of COVID-19 disease remains to be determined. Our results also show that the seroprevalence of IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in blood donors and non-COVID-19 patients seen at a tertiary care hospital in the San Francisco Bay Area from March to April 2020 is very low at 0.10% (95% CI: 0.00% - 0.56%). and 0.26% (0.00% - 0.76%), respectively. These seroprevalence rates in two distinct populations in the San Francisco Bay Area are near the specificity limit of the Architect assay, and are far lower than the specificity limits for many lateral flow immunoassays¹¹. Our findings contrast with those from other community-based studies that reported higher rates of seropositivity in California^12,13, and underscore the importance of using a highly accurate test for surveillance studies in low-prevalence populations. They also indicate a very low likelihood of widespread cryptic circulation of SARS-CoV-2 in the Bay Area prior to March 2020, consistent with the low detection rate by direct viral testing of respiratory samples collected during that early time period¹⁴.