COVID-19 Serology at Population Scale: SARS-CoV-2-Specific Antibody Responses in Saliva

  1. Nora Pisanic
  2. Pranay R. Randad
  3. Kate Kruczynski
  4. Yukari C. Manabe
  5. David L. Thomas
  6. Andrew Pekosz
  7. Sabra L. Klein
  8. Michael J. Betenbaugh
  9. William A. Clarke
  10. Oliver Laeyendecker
  11. Patrizio P. Caturegli
  12. H. Benjamin Larman
  13. Barbara Detrick
  14. Jessica K. Fairley
  15. Amy C. Sherman
  16. Nadine Rouphael
  17. Srilatha Edupuganti
  18. Douglas A. Granger
  19. Steve W. Granger
  20. Matthew H. Collins
  21. Christopher D. Heaney

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of an ongoing pandemic that has infected over 36 million and killed over 1 million people. Informed implementation of government public health policies depends on accurate data on SARS-CoV-2 immunity at a population scale. We hypothesized that detection of SARS-CoV-2 salivary antibodies could serve as a noninvasive alternative to serological testing for monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 infection and seropositivity at a population scale.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1128/jcm.02204-20
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.24.20112300: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: Participants provided verbal and / or written informed consent and provided saliva and blood specimens for analysis.
    IRB: Participation in these studies was voluntary and the study protocols have been approved by the respective Institutional Review Boards.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Coupling of antigens to beads was confirmed using antibody against the antigen or against the tag (e.g. anti-His(6) tag antibody), if present (Table 1), followed by a species-specific R-phycoerythrin (PE)-labelled antibody and was considered successful if the median fluorescence intensity (MFI [a.u.]) was >10,000 at 1 μg/mL of antigen-specific antibody (except the BSA-conjugated bead set).
    antibody against the antigen or against the tag
    suggested: None
    anti-His(6
    suggested: None
    R-phycoerythrin
    suggested: None
    antigen-specific
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Finally, the MFI of each bead set was measured on a Bio-Plex® immunoassay instrument (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA).
    Bio-Rad Laboratories
    suggested: (Bio-Rad Laboratories, RRID:SCR_008426)

    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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    This study has several limitations. First, our collection of saliva and serum samples was predominantly obtained from independent cohorts, and it contained 28 matched saliva and serum samples collected from the same participants at the same time. In future studies, the performance of this assay should be compared between saliva and serum in a large sample of matched saliva and serum samples. Second, all saliva data was cross sectional and we were not able to evaluate the temporal kinetics of saliva SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses using repeated measures within the same individual. Longitudinal analysis would allow us to evaluate the temporal kinetics and magnitude of SARS-CoV-2 IgG, IgA, and IgM responses, resolve synchronous vs. classical isotype responses (IgM followed by IgA followed by IgG) following SARS-CoV-2 infection.42 Additional investigation with convalescent phase saliva and sera are needed to determine the stability of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG responses. Third, we did not have information on severity of SARS-CoV-2 disease from each participant in this study, and thus were not able to determine the impact of severity of infection on antibody responses.29 Prior studies suggest that antibody responses are slightly elevated among individuals with severe infection.29,30,42 Future analysis should determine how severity of infection, and infectious dose, modifies antibody responses. Fourth, we did not determine receiver operating characteristic (ROC)-optimized MFI cut offs...

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.24.20112300 on medRxiv