Abstract
Introduction The high proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infections that have remained undetected presents a challenge to tracking the progress of the pandemic and estimating the extent of population immunity.
Methods We used residual blood samples from women attending antenatal care services at three hospitals in Kenya between August 2020 and October 2021and a validated IgG ELISA for SARS-Cov-2 spike protein and adjusted the results for assay sensitivity and specificity. We fitted a two-component mixture model as an alternative to the threshold analysis to estimate of the proportion of individuals with past SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Results We estimated seroprevalence in 2,981 women; 706 in Nairobi, 567 in Busia and 1,708 in Kilifi. By October 2021, 13% of participants were vaccinated (at least one dose) in Nairobi, 2% in Busia. Adjusted seroprevalence rose in all sites; from 50% (95%CI 42-58) in August 2020, to 85% (95%CI 78-92) in October 2021 in Nairobi; from 31% (95%CI 25-37) in May 2021 to 71% (95%CI 64-77) in October 2021 in Busia; and from 1% (95% CI 0-3) in September 2020 to 63% (95% CI 56-69) in October 2021 in Kilifi. Mixture modelling, suggests adjusted cross-sectional prevalence estimates are underestimates; seroprevalence in October 2021 could be 74% in Busia and 72% in Kilifi.
Conclusions There has been substantial, unobserved transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in Nairobi, Busia and Kilifi Counties. Due to the length of time since the beginning of the pandemic, repeated cross-sectional surveys are now difficult to interpret without the use of models to account for antibody waning.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This project was funded by the Wellcome Trust (grants 220991/Z/20/Z and 203077/Z/16/Z), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-017547), and the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) through the East Africa Research Fund (EARF/ITT/039) and is part of an integrated programme of SARS-CoV-2 sero-surveillance in Kenya led by KEMRI Wellcome Trust Research Programme. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Not Applicable
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The need for individual informed consent from the women whose samples were studied was waived, the protocol was approved by the Scientific and Ethics Review Unit (SERU) of the Kenya Medical Research Institute (Protocol SSC 4085), the Kenyatta National Hospital ? University of Nairobi Ethics Review Committee (Protocol P327/06/2020) and the Busia & Kilifi County health management teams.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Not Applicable
I 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).
Not Applicable
I 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.
Not Applicable
Data Availability
Data are available from the KWTRP Data Governance Committee (contact via dgc@kemri-wellcome.org) for researchers who meet the criteria for access. Criteria include: The requestor has a disclosed hypothesis and research question that can be answered using the data. The requestor is affiliated with a reputable research organisation, which has capacity to store and analyse the data according to good clinical practice / good data management practice.
