PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Nakamura, Akihiro AU - Sato, Ryoichi AU - Ando, Sanae AU - Oana, Natsuko AU - Nozaki, Eiji AU - Endo, Hideaki AU - Miyate, Yoshiharu AU - Soma, Jun AU - Miyata, Go TI - Seroprevalence of Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in Healthcare Workers in Non-epidemic Region: A Report from Iwate Prefecture in Japan AID - 10.1101/2020.06.15.20132316 DP - 2020 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2020.06.15.20132316 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/06/17/2020.06.15.20132316.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/06/17/2020.06.15.20132316.full AB - Background As of June 8, 2020, Iwate is the only one of 47 prefectures in Japan with no confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. Serological survey for COVID-19 antibodies is crucial in area with low prevalence as well as epidemic area when addressing health and social issues caused by COVID-19. Rapid, accurate and easy-to-use antibody tests as well laboratory-based antibody tests are necessary for confirming immunity in a given community.Methods Serum samples from healthcare workers (n = 1,000, mean 40 ± 11 years) of Iwate Prefectural Central Hospital, Iwate, Japan were tested for the prevalence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies. Two laboratory-based quantitative tests (Abbott Architect® SARS-CoV-2 IgG and Roche Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assays) and one point-of-care (POC) qualitative test (Alfa Instant-view® plus COVID-19 Test) were performed simultaneously. Sensitivity and specificity were 100%, 99.6% in Abbott assay; 100%, 99.8% in Roche assay; 97.8%, 94.6% in Alfa POC test, respectively.Results The laboratory-based quantitative tests showed positive in 4 of 1,000 samples (0.4%) (95% CI: 0.01 to 0.79): 4/1,000 (0.4%) (95% CI: 0.01 to 0.79) in Abbott; 0/1,000 (0%) in Roche. Positive samples were not detected for both Abbott and Roche assays. The POC qualitative test showed positive in 33 of 1,000 samples (3.3%) (95% CI: 2.19 to 4.41), showing higher rates than those of the laboratory-based quantitative tests. There were no samples with simultaneous positive reaction for two quantitative tests and a POC test.Conclusions Infected COVID-2 cases were not confirmed by a retrospective serological study in healthcare workers of our hospital. The POC qualitative tests with lower specificity have the potential for higher false positive reactions than the laboratory-based quantitative tests in areas with very low prevalence of COVID-19.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any specific grants from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.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:The authors declare that they have no competing interests.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.YesYesCMIAchemiluminescence microparticle immunoassayCOVID-19coronavirus disease 2019ECLIAelectro chemiluminescence immunoassayIgimmunoglobinsPOCpoint-of-careRT-PCRreal-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reactionSARS-CoV-2acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2