Serological prevalence of antibodies to SARS CoV-2 amongst cancer centre staff

  1. Karol Sikora
  2. Ian Barwick
  3. Ceri Hamilton

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objectives

the aim of this study was to test Rutherford Health (RH) staff for the presence of SARS CoV-2 antibodies to reduce the risk of infection to cancer patients.

Setting

Between 14 and 24 April 2020 we tested 161 staff at four locations: our cancer centres in Reading - Berkshire, Newport - S Wales, Liverpool - Merseyside, and Bedlington in Northumberland.

Participants

Testing was available to all staff who were on site at the four locations named above at the time the study was carried out. 161 staff (80 men, 81 women) gave voluntary consent to have the tests and all testing gave rise to valid results.

Interventions

We used the South Korean test for antibodies to SARS CoV-2: Sugentech SGTi-flex COVID-19 IgM/IgG 1 . For each test, blood was collected and added to the sample well of the test cassette and buffer solution added. The test result was legible after 15 minutes. Outcome measures: The number of tests positive for the presence of antibodies was the primary outcome measure. The ratio of tests positive for the presence of IgM antibodies versus IgG antibodies was the secondary outcome measure.

Results

Between 14 and 24 April 2020, 161 staff (age m = 43) were tested at four Rutherford Cancer Care centres that offer proton beam therapy, radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Out of 161, 12 samples (7.50%) tested positive of which 7 samples (4.35%) detected IgM only, 2 samples (1.24%) detected IgG only and 3 samples (1.86%) detected both IgM and IgG.

Conclusions

The low seroconversion rate in the sample population limits the current utility of the test as a way of reducing risk to vulnerable patient populations but longitudinal retesting will provide further data.

    Strengths and limitations of the study

  • This is the first UK study on SARS CoV-2 antibody testing using the Sugentech SGTi-flex COVID-19 IgM/IgG in the workplace;

  • This is the first UK study testing a population of cancer centre staff for SARS CoV-2 antibodies;

  • This study builds on similar studies in other countries 3-4 , albeit with a smaller sample;

  • Data on previous clinical symptoms is not included. We are in the process of revising consent paperwork for the test to include a question about previous symptoms like temperature, dry/persistent cough;

  • Patient data is not included. We will consider testing patients once the pilot test with staff has reached conclusions about the efficacy and value of the test.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.16.20099408: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.16.20099408v1 on medRxiv