Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia.
School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
PLoS One. 2021 Apr 2;16(4):e0248946. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248946. eCollection 2021.
Accurate seroprevalence estimates of SARS-CoV-2 in different populations could clarify the extent to which current testing strategies are identifying all active infection, and hence the true magnitude and spread of the infection. Our primary objective was to identify valid seroprevalence studies of SARS-CoV-2 infection and compare their estimates with the reported, and imputed, COVID-19 case rates within the same population at the same time point.
We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane COVID-19 trials, and Europe-PMC for published studies and pre-prints that reported anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG, IgM and/or IgA antibodies for serosurveys of the general community from 1 Jan to 12 Aug 2020.
Of the 2199 studies identified, 170 were assessed for full text and 17 studies representing 15 regions and 118,297 subjects were includable. The seroprevalence proportions in 8 studies ranged between 1%-10%, with 5 studies under 1%, and 4 over 10%-from the notably hard-hit regions of Gangelt, Germany; Northwest Iran; Buenos Aires, Argentina; and Stockholm, Sweden. For seropositive cases who were not previously identified as COVID-19 cases, the majority had prior COVID-like symptoms. The estimated seroprevalences ranged from 0.56-717 times greater than the number of reported cumulative cases-half of the studies reported greater than 10 times more SARS-CoV-2 infections than the cumulative number of cases.
The findings show SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence is well below "herd immunity" in all countries studied. The estimated number of infections, however, were much greater than the number of reported cases and deaths in almost all locations. The majority of seropositive people reported prior COVID-like symptoms, suggesting that undertesting of symptomatic people may be causing a substantial under-ascertainment of SARS-CoV-2 infections.
准确评估不同人群中 SARS-CoV-2 的血清流行率可以明确当前检测策略识别所有现症感染的程度,进而明确感染的真实规模和传播范围。我们的主要目的是确定 SARS-CoV-2 感染的有效血清流行率研究,并将其结果与同一时间点同一人群中报告的和推断的 COVID-19 病例率进行比较。
我们检索了 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane COVID-19 试验和 Europe-PMC,以获取截至 2020 年 8 月 12 日发表的和预印本形式报告针对一般人群进行的 SARS-CoV-2 血清学调查的 IgG、IgM 和/或 IgA 抗体的研究。
在确定的 2199 项研究中,有 170 项研究进行了全文评估,有 17 项研究来自 15 个地区,纳入了 118297 例受试者。8 项研究的血清流行率比例在 1%-10%之间,其中 5 项研究低于 1%,4 项研究高于 10%-来自德国 Gangelt、伊朗西北部、阿根廷布宜诺斯艾利斯和瑞典斯德哥尔摩等受影响严重的地区。对于先前未被确定为 COVID-19 病例的血清阳性病例,大多数人有类似 COVID-19 的症状。估计的血清流行率比报告的累计病例数高 0.56-717 倍-一半的研究报告 SARS-CoV-2 感染的数量比报告的病例数多 10 倍以上。
研究结果表明,在所有研究的国家中,SARS-CoV-2 的血清流行率远低于“群体免疫”。然而,几乎所有地点的感染估计数都远远超过报告的病例数和死亡数。大多数血清阳性患者报告了类似 COVID-19 的症状,这表明对有症状人群的检测不足可能导致对 SARS-CoV-2 感染的大量漏报。