RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Current challenges of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) seroprevalence studies among blood donors: A scoping review
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.05.13.21257177
DO 10.1101/2021.05.13.21257177
A1 Saeed, Sahar
A1 Uzicanin, Samra
A1 Lewin, Antoine
A1 Lieshout-Krikke, Ryanne
A1 Faddy, Helen
A1 Erikstrup, Christian
A1 Osiowy, Carla
A1 Seed, Clive
A1 Steele, Whitney
A1 Davidson, Katy
A1 Custer, Brian
A1 O’Brien, Sheila
A1 ,
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/05/17/2021.05.13.21257177.abstract
AB Background Blood donors are increasingly being recognized as an informative resource for surveillance. We aimed to review and characterize SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies conducted using blood donors to investigate methodology and provide guidance for future research.Methods We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed and preprint publications between January 2020 to January 2021. Two reviewers used standardized forms to extract seroprevalence estimates and data on methodology pertaining to population sampling, periodicity, assay characteristics and antibody kinetics. National data on cumulative incidence and social distancing policies were extracted from publicly available sources and summarized.Results Thirty-three studies representing 1,323,307 blood donations from 20 countries worldwide were included (sample size per study ranged from 22 to 953,926 donations). Seroprevalence rates ranged from 0% to 76% (after adjusting for waning antibodies). Overall, less than 1 in 5 studies reported standardized seroprevalence rates to reflect the demographics of the general population. Stratification by age and sex were most common (64% of studies), followed by region (48%). 52% of studies reported seroprevalence at a single time point. Overall, 27 unique assay combinations were identified, 55% of studies used a single assay and only 39% adjusted seroprevalence rates for imperfect test characteristics. Among the eight nationally representative studies case detection was most underrepresented in Kenya (1:1264).Conclusion As of December 11, 2020, 79% of studies reported seroprevalence rates <10%; thresholds far from reaching herd immunity. In addition to differences in community transmission and diverse public health policies, study designs and methodology were likely contributing factors to seroprevalence heterogeneity.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementCanadian Blood ServicesAuthor 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:NAAll 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.YesList of references included in this scoping review are available