Background Assessing the burden of COVID-19 on the basis of medically attended case numbers is suboptimal given its reliance on testing strategy, changing case definitions, and disease presentation. Population-based serosurveys measuring anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (anti-SARS-CoV-2) antibodies provide one method for estimating infection rates and monitoring the progression of the epidemic. Here, we estimate weekly seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the population of Geneva, Switzerland, during the epidemic.Methods The SEROCoV-POP study is a population-based study of former participants of the Bus Santé study and their household members. We planned a series of 12 consecutive weekly serosurveys among randomly selected participants from a previous population-representative survey, and their household members aged 5 years and older. We tested each participant for anti-SARS-CoV-2-IgG antibodies using a commercially available ELISA. We estimated seroprevalence using a Bayesian logistic regression model taking into account test performance and adjusting for the age and sex of Geneva's population. Here we present results from the first 5 weeks of the study. FindingsBetween April 6 and May 9, 2020, we enrolled 2766 participants from 1339 households, with a demographic distribution similar to that of the canton of Geneva. In the first week, we estimated a seroprevalence of 4•8% (95% CI 2•4-8•0, n=341). The estimate increased to 8•5% (5•9-11•4, n=469) in the second week, to 10•9% (7•9-14•4, n=577) in the third week, 6•6% (4•3-9•4, n=604) in the fourth week, and 10•8% (8•2-13•9, n=775) in the fifth week. Individuals aged 5-9 years (relative risk [RR] 0•32 [95% CI 0•11-0•63]) and those older than 65 years (RR 0•50 [0•28-0•78]) had a significantly lower risk of being seropositive than those aged 20-49 years. After accounting for the time to seroconversion, we estimated that for every reported confirmed case, there were 11•6 infections in the community.Interpretation These results suggest that most of the population of Geneva remained uninfected during this wave of the pandemic, despite the high prevalence of COVID-19 in the region (5000 reported clinical cases over <2•5 months in the population of half a million people). Assuming that the presence of IgG antibodies is associated with immunity, these results highlight that the epidemic is far from coming to an end by means of fewer susceptible people in the population. Further, a significantly lower seroprevalence was observed for children aged 5-9 years and adults older than 65 years, compared with those aged 10-64 years. These results will inform countries considering the easing of restrictions aimed at curbing transmission.

Unhealthy behaviors and their social patterning have been frequently proposed as factors mediating socioeconomic differences in health. However, a clear quantification of the contribution of health behaviors to the socioeconomic gradient in health is lacking. This study systematically reviews the role of health behaviors in explaining socioeconomic inequalities in health. Published studies were identified by a systematic review of PubMed, Embase and Web-of-Science. Four health behaviors were considered: smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity and diet. We restricted health outcomes to cardiometabolic disorders and mortality. To allow comparison between studies, the contribution of health behaviors, or the part of the socioeconomic gradient in health that is explained by health behaviors, was recalculated in all studies according to the absolute scale difference method. We identified 114 articles on socioeconomic position, health behaviors and cardiometabolic disorders or mortality from electronic databases and articles reference lists. Lower socioeconomic position was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality and cardiometabolic disorders, this gradient was explained by health behaviors to varying degrees (minimum contribution -43%; maximum contribution 261%). Health behaviors explained a larger proportion of the SEP-health gradient in studies conducted in North America and Northern Europe, in studies examining all-cause mortality and cardiovascular disease, among men, in younger individuals, and in longitudinal studies, when compared to other settings. Of the four behaviors examined, smoking contributed the most to social inequalities in health, with a median contribution of 19%. Health behaviors contribute to the socioeconomic gradient in cardiometabolic disease and mortality, but this contribution varies according to population and study characteristics. Nevertheless, our results should encourage the implementation of interventions targeting health behaviors, as they may reduce socioeconomic inequalities in health and increase population health.

41Background: Assessing the burden of COVID-19 based on medically-attended case counts is 42 suboptimal given its reliance on testing strategy, changing case definitions and the wide spectrum of 43 disease presentation. Population-based serosurveys provide one avenue for estimating infection rates 44 and monitoring the progression of the epidemic, overcoming many of these limitations. 45 46 Methods: Taking advantage of a pool of adult participants from population-representative surveys 47

BackgroundNasopharyngeal antigen Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDTs) and saliva RT-PCR have shown variable performance to detect SARS-CoV-2.MethodsIn October 2020, we conducted a prospective trial involving patients presenting at testing centers with symptoms of COVID-19. We compared detection rates and performance of RDT, saliva PCR and nasopharyngeal (NP) PCR.ResultsOut of 949 patients enrolled, 928 patients had all three tests. Detection rates were 35.2% (95%CI 32.2-38.4%) by RDT, 39.8% (36.6-43.0%) by saliva PCR, 40.1% (36.9-43.3%) by NP PCR, and 41.5% (38.3-44.7%) by any test. For those with viral loads (VL) ≥106 copies/ml, detection rates were 30.3% (27.3-33.3), 31.4% (28.4-34.5), 31.5% (28.5-34.6), and 31.6% (28.6-34.7%) respectively.Sensitivity of RDT compared to NP PCR was 87.4% (83.6-90.6%) for all positive patients and 96.5% (93.6-98.3%) for those with VL≥106. Sensitivity of STANDARD-Q®, Panbio™ and COVID-VIRO® Ag tests were 92.9% (86.4-96.9%), 86.1% (78.6-91.7%) and 84.1% (76.9-89.7%), respectively. For those with VL≥106, sensitivities were 96.6% (90.5-99.3%), 97.8% (92.1-99.7%) and 95.3% (89.4-98.5%) respectively. Specificity of RDT was 100% (99.3-100%) compared to any PCR. RDT sensitivity was similar <4 days (87.8%) and ≥4 days (85.7%) after symptoms onset (p=0.6). Sensitivities of saliva and NP PCR were 95.7% (93.1-97.5%) and 96.5% (94.1-98.1%), respectively, compared to the other PCR.ConclusionsThe high performance of RDTs allows rapid identification of COVID cases with immediate isolation of the vast majority of contagious individuals. RDT could be a game changer in primary care practices, and even more so in resource-constrained settings. PCR on saliva can replace NP PCR.ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT04613310

Understanding the risk of infection from household- and community-exposures and the transmissibility of asymptomatic infections is critical to SARS-CoV-2 control. Limited previous evidence is based primarily on virologic testing, which disproportionately misses mild and asymptomatic infections. Serologic measures are more likely to capture all previously infected individuals. We apply household transmission models to data from a cross-sectional, household-based population serosurvey of 4,534 people ≥5 years from 2,267 households enrolled April-June 2020 in Geneva, Switzerland. We found that the risk of infection from exposure to a single infected household member aged ≥5 years (17.3%,13.7-21.7) was more than three-times that of extra-household exposures over the first pandemic wave (5.1%,4.5-5.8). Young children had a lower risk of infection from household members. Working-age adults had the highest extra-household infection risk. Seropositive asymptomatic household members had 69.4% lower odds (95%CrI,31.8-88.8%) of infecting another household member compared to those reporting symptoms, accounting for 14.5% (95%CrI, 7.2-22.7%) of all household infections.

BackgroundPopulation-based serological surveys provide a means for assessing the immunologic landscape of a community, without the biases related to health-seeking behaviors and testing practices typically associated with rt-PCR testing. This study assesses SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence over the first epidemic wave in Canton Geneva, Switzerland, as well as biological and socio-economic risk factors for infection and symptoms associated with IgG seropositivity.Methods and findingsBetween April 6 and June 30, 2020, former participants of a yearly representative cross-sectional survey of the 20-75-year-old population of the canton of Geneva were invited to participate in a seroprevalence study, along with household members five years and older. We collected blood and tested it for anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulins G (IgG). Questionnaires were self-administered. We estimated seroprevalence with a Bayesian model accounting for test performance and sampling design. We included 8344 participants (53.5% women, mean age 46.9 years). The population-level seroprevalence over the 12-week study period was 7.8 % (95% Credible Interval (CrI) 6.8-8.9), accounting for sex, age and household random effects. Seroprevalence was highest among 18-49 year olds (9.5%, 95%CrI 8.1-10.9), with young children (5-9 years) and those >65 years having significantly lower seroprevalence (4.3% and 4.7-5.4% respectively). Men were more likely to be seropositive than women (relative risk 1.2, 95%CrI 1.1-1.4). Odds of seropositivity were reduced for female retirees (0.46, 95%CI 0.23-0.93) and unemployed men (0.35, 95%CI 0.13-1.0) compared to employed individuals, and for current smokers (0.36, 95%CI 0.23-0.55) compared to never-smokers. We found no significant association between occupation, level of education, neighborhood income and the risk of being seropositive. Symptoms most strongly associated with seropositivity were anosmia/dysgeusia, loss of appetite, fever, fatigue and myalgia and/or arthralgia. Thirteen percent of seropositive participants reported no symptoms.ConclusionsOur results confirm a low population seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after the first wave in Geneva, a region hard hit by the COVID-19 pandemic. Socioeconomic factors were not associated with seropositivity in this sample. The elderly and young children were less frequently seropositive, though it is not clear how biology and behaviors shape these differences. These specificities should be considered when assessing the need for targeted public health measures.

Background Serological assays detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are being widely deployed in studies and clinical practice. However, the duration and effectiveness of the protection conferred by the immune response remains to be assessed in population-based samples. To estimate the incidence of newly acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections in seropositive individuals as compared to seronegative controls we conducted a retrospective longitudinal matched study. Methods A seroprevalence survey including a representative sample of the population was conducted in Geneva, Switzerland between April and June 2020, immediately after the first pandemic wave. Seropositive participants were matched one-to-two to seronegative controls, using a propensity-score including age, gender, immunodeficiency, BMI, smoking status and education level. Each individual was linked to a state-registry of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Our primary outcome was confirmed infections occurring from serological status assessment to the end of the second pandemic wave (January 2021). Results Among 8344 serosurvey participants, 498 seropositive individuals were selected and matched with 996 seronegative controls. After a mean follow-up of 35.6 (SD 3.2) weeks, 7 out of 498 (1.4%) seropositive subjects had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, of whom 5 (1.0%) were classified as reinfections. In contrast, the infection rate was higher in seronegative individuals (15.5%, 154/996) during a similar follow-up period (mean 34.7 [SD 3.2] weeks), corresponding to a 94% (95%CI 86% to 98%, P&lt;0.001) reduction in the hazard of having a positive SARS-CoV-2 test for seropositives. Conclusions Seroconversion after SARS-CoV-2 infection confers protection against reinfection lasting at least 8 months. These findings could help global health authorities establishing priority for vaccine allocation.

Importance: Knowing the transmissibility of asymptomatic infections and risk of infection from household and community exposures is critical to SARS-CoV-2 control. Limited previous evidence is based primarily on virologic testing, which disproportionately misses mild and asymptomatic infections. Serologic measures are more likely to capture all previously infected individuals. Objective: Estimate the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection from household and community exposures, and identify key risk factors for transmission and infection. Design: Household serosurvey and transmission model. Setting: Population-based serosurvey in Geneva, Switzerland Participants: 4,524 household members five years and older from 2,267 households enrolled April-June 2020. Exposures: SARS-CoV-2 infected (seropositive) household members and background risk of community transmission. Main outcomes and measures: Past SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed through anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies by ELISA. Chain-binomial models based on the number of infections within households were used to estimate extra-household infection risk by demographics and reported extra-household contacts, and infection risk from exposure to an infected household member by demographics and infector's symptoms. Infections attributable to exposure to different types of infectious individuals were estimated. Results: The chance of being infected by a single SARS-CoV-2 infected household member was 17.2% (95%CrI 13.6-21.5%) compared to a cumulative extra-household infection risk of 5.1% (95%CrI 4.5-5.8%). Infection risk from an infected household member increased with age, from 7.5% (95%CrI 1.3-20.3%) among 5-9 years to 30.2% (95%CrI 14.3-48.2%) among those ≥65 years. Working-age adults (20-49 years) had the highest extra-household infection risk. Seropositive household members not reporting symptoms had 74.8% lower odds (95%CrI 43.8-90.3%) of infecting another household member compared to those reporting symptoms, accounting for 19.6% (95%CrI 12.9-24.5%) of all household infections. Conclusions and Relevance: The risk of infection from exposure to a single infected household member was four-times that of extra-household exposures over the first wave of the pandemic. Young children had a lower risk from infection from household members. Asymptomatic infections are far less likely to transmit than symptomatic ones but do cause infections. While the small households in Geneva limit the contribution of household spread, household transmission likely plays a greater role in other settings.