Search

COVID-19 disproportionately affected minorities, while research barriers to engage underserved communities persist. Serological studies reveal infection and vaccination histories within these communities, however lack of consensus on downstream evaluation methods impede meta-analyses and dampen the broader public health impact. To reveal the impact of COVID-19 and vaccine uptake among diverse communities and to develop rigorous serological downstream evaluation methods, we engaged racial and ethnic minorities in Massachusetts in a cross-sectional study (April-July 2022), screened blood and saliva for SARS-CoV-2 and human endemic coronavirus (hCoV) antibodies by bead-based multiplex assay and point-of-care (POC) test and developed across-plate normalization and classification boundary methods for optimal qualitative serological assessments. Among 290 participants, 91.4% reported receiving at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, while 41.7% reported past SARS-CoV-2 infections, which was confirmed by POC- and multiplex-based saliva and blood IgG seroprevalences. We found significant differences in antigen-specific IgA and IgG antibody outcomes and indication of cross-reactivity with hCoV OC43. Finally, 26.5% of participants reported lingering COVID-19 symptoms, mostly middle-aged Latinas. Hence, prolonged COVID-19 symptoms were common among our underserved population and require public health attention, despite high COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Saliva served as a less-invasive sample-type for IgG-based serosurveys and hCoV cross-reactivity needed to be evaluated for reliable SARS-CoV-2 serosurvey results. The use of the developed rigorous downstream qualitative serological assessment methods will help standardize serosurvey outcomes and meta-analyses for future serosurveys beyond SARS-CoV-2., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Binder et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

COVID-19 has highlighted challenges in the measurement quality and comparability of serological binding and neutralization assays. Due to many different assay formats and reagents, these measurements are known to be highly variable with large uncertainties. The development of the WHO international standard (WHO IS) and other pool standards have facilitated assay comparability through normalization to a common material but does not provide assay harmonization nor uncertainty quantification. In this paper, we present the results from an interlaboratory study that led to the development of (1) a novel hierarchy of data analyses based on the thermodynamics of antibody binding and (2) a modeling framework that quantifies the probability of neutralization potential for a given binding measurement. Importantly, we introduced a precise, mathematical definition of harmonization that separates the sources of quantitative uncertainties, some of which can be corrected to enable, for the first time, assay comparability. Both the theory and experimental data confirmed that mAbs and WHO IS performed identically as a primary standard for establishing traceability and bridging across different assay platforms. The metrological anchoring of complex serological binding and neuralization assays and fast turn-around production of an mAb reference control can enable the unprecedented comparability and traceability of serological binding assay results for new variants of SARS-CoV-2 and immune responses to other viruses.

An accurate multiclass classification strategy is crucial to interpreting antibody tests. However, traditional methods based on confidence intervals or receiver operating characteristics lack clear extensions to settings with more than two classes. We address this problem by developing a multiclass classification based on probabilistic modeling and optimal decision theory that minimizes the convex combination of false classification rates. The classification process is challenging when the relative fraction of the population in each class, or generalized prevalence, is unknown. Thus, we also develop a method for estimating the generalized prevalence of test data that is independent of classification of the test data. We validate our approach on serological data with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) naïve, previously infected, and vaccinated classes. Synthetic data are used to demonstrate that (i) prevalence estimates are unbiased and converge to true values and (ii) our procedure applies to arbitrary measurement dimensions. In contrast to the binary problem, the multiclass setting offers wide-reaching utility as the most general framework and provides new insight into prevalence estimation best practices., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has emphasized the importance and challenges of correctly interpreting antibody test results. Identification of positive and negative samples requires a classification strategy with low error rates, which is hard to achieve when the corresponding measurement values overlap. Additional uncertainty arises when classification schemes fail to account for complicated structure in data. We address these problems through a mathematical framework that combines high dimensional data modeling and optimal decision theory. Specifically, we show that appropriately increasing the dimension of data better separates positive and negative populations and reveals nuanced structure that can be described in terms of mathematical models. We combine these models with optimal decision theory to yield a classification scheme that better separates positive and negative samples relative to traditional methods such as confidence intervals (CIs) and receiver operating characteristics. We validate the usefulness of this approach in the context of a multiplex salivary SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G assay dataset. This example illustrates how our analysis: (i) improves the assay accuracy, (e.g. lowers classification errors by up to 42% compared to CI methods); (ii) reduces the number of indeterminate samples when an inconclusive class is permissible, (e.g. by 40% compared to the original analysis of the example multiplex dataset) and (iii) decreases the number of antigens needed to classify samples. Our work showcases the power of mathematical modeling in diagnostic classification and highlights a method that can be adopted broadly in public health and clinical settings., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: RAL, AJK, NP, CDH, and PNP have no conflicts of interest to declare. YCM has received consulting fees from Abbott Diagnostics; served leadership or fiduciary roles in the Infectious Diseases Institute, Infectious Diseases Society of America, and WHOTDR; and her institution received reagents from Hologic, Chembio, Roche, Cepheid, and Becton-Dickinson for studies. DLT has received funds for Merck DSMB board membership, consulting fees and stock or stock option for Excision Bio, fees for expert testimony, honoraria for CME programs only, and royalties from UpToDate., (Copyright: This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.)

Serology testing can identify past infection by quantifying the immune response of an infected individual providing important public health guidance. Individual immune responses are time-dependent, which is reflected in antibody measurements. Moreover, the probability of obtaining a particular measurement from a random sample changes due to changing prevalence (i.e., seroprevalence, or fraction of individuals exhibiting an immune response) of the disease in the population. Taking into account these personal and population-level effects, we develop a mathematical model that suggests a natural adaptive scheme for estimating prevalence as a function of time. We then combine the estimated prevalence with optimal decision theory to develop a time-dependent probabilistic classification scheme that minimizes the error associated with classifying a value as positive (history of infection) or negative (no such history) on a given day since the start of the pandemic. We validate this analysis by using a combination of real-world and synthetic SARS-CoV-2 data and discuss the type of longitudinal studies needed to execute this scheme in real-world settings., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

In diagnostic testing, establishing an indeterminate class is an effective way to identify samples that cannot be accurately classified. However, such approaches also make testing less efficient and must be balanced against overall assay performance. We address this problem by reformulating data classification in terms of a constrained optimization problem that (i) minimizes the probability of labeling samples as indeterminate while (ii) ensuring that the remaining ones are classified with an average target accuracy X. We show that the solution to this problem is expressed in terms of a bathtub-type principle that holds out those samples with the lowest local accuracy up to an X-dependent threshold. To illustrate the usefulness of this analysis, we apply it to a multiplex, saliva-based SARS-CoV-2 antibody assay and demonstrate up to a 30 % reduction in the number of indeterminate samples relative to more traditional approaches., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Formulating accurate and robust classification strategies is a key challenge of developing diagnostic and antibody tests. Methods that do not explicitly account for disease prevalence and uncertainty therein can lead to significant classification errors. We present a novel method that leverages optimal decision theory to address this problem. As a preliminary step, we develop an analysis that uses an assumed prevalence and conditional probability models of diagnostic measurement outcomes to define optimal (in the sense of minimizing rates of false positives and false negatives) classification domains. Critically, we demonstrate how this strategy can be generalized to a setting in which the prevalence is unknown by either (i) defining a third class of hold-out samples that require further testing or (ii) using an adaptive algorithm to estimate prevalence prior to defining classification domains. We also provide examples for a recently published SARS-CoV-2 serology test and discuss how measurement uncertainty (e.g. associated with instrumentation) can be incorporated into the analysis. We find that our new strategy decreases classification error by up to a decade relative to more traditional methods based on confidence intervals. Moreover, it establishes a theoretical foundation for generalizing techniques such as receiver operating characteristics by connecting them to the broader field of optimization., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications.)

Quantitative and robust serology assays are critical measurements underpinning global COVID-19 response to diagnostic, surveillance, and vaccine development. Here, we report a proof-of-concept approach for the development of quantitative, multiplexed flow cytometry-based serological and neutralization assays. The serology assays test the IgG and IgM against both the full-length spike antigens and the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the spike antigen. Benchmarking against an RBD-specific SARS-CoV IgG reference standard, the anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD antibody titer was quantified in the range of 37.6 µg/mL to 31.0 ng/mL. The quantitative assays are highly specific with no correlative cross-reactivity with the spike proteins of MERS, SARS1, OC43 and HKU1 viruses. We further demonstrated good correlation between anti-RBD antibody titers and neutralizing antibody titers. The suite of serology and neutralization assays help to improve measurement confidence and are complementary and foundational for clinical and epidemiologic studies.