Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a large nationwide sample of patients on dialysis in the USA: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

Background Many patients receiving dialysis in the USA share the socioeconomic characteristics of underserved communities, and undergo routine monthly laboratory testing, facilitating a practical, unbiased, and repeatable assessment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) seroprevalence. Methods For this cross-sectional study, in partnership with a central laboratory that receives samples from approximately 1300 dialysis facilities across the USA, we tested the remainder plasma of 28 503 randomly selected adult patients receiving dialysis in July, 2020, using a spike protein receptor binding domain total antibody chemiluminescence assay (100% sensitivity, 99·8% specificity). We extracted data on age, sex, race and ethnicity, and residence and facility ZIP codes from the anonymised electronic health records, linking patient-level residence data with cumulative and daily cases and deaths per 100 000 population and with nasal swab test positivity rates. We standardised prevalence estimates according to the overall US dialysis and adult population, and present estimates for four prespecified strata (age, sex, region, and race and ethnicity). Findings The sampled population had similar age, sex, and race and ethnicity distribution to the US dialysis population, with a higher proportion of older people, men, and people living in majority Black and Hispanic neighbourhoods than in the US adult population. Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was 8·0% (95% CI 7·7–8·4) in the sample, 8·3% (8·0–8·6) when standardised to the US dialysis population, and 9·3% (8·8–9·9) when standardised to the US adult population. When standardised to the US dialysis population, seroprevalence ranged from 3·5% (3·1–3·9) in the west to 27·2% (25·9–28·5) in the northeast. Comparing seroprevalent and case counts per 100 000 population, we found that 9·2% (8·7–9·8) of seropositive patients were diagnosed. When compared with other measures of SARS-CoV-2 spread, seroprevalence correlated best with deaths per 100 000 population (Spearman's ρ=0·77). Residents of non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic neighbourhoods experienced higher odds of seropositivity (odds ratio 3·9 [95% CI 3·4–4·6] and 2·3 [1·9–2·6], respectively) compared with residents of predominantly non-Hispanic white neighbourhoods. Residents of neighbourhoods in the highest population density quintile experienced increased odds of seropositivity (10·3 [8·7–12·2]) compared with residents of the lowest density quintile. County mobility restrictions that reduced workplace visits by at least 5% in early March, 2020, were associated with lower odds of seropositivity in July, 2020 (0·4 [0·3–0·5]) when compared with a reduction of less than 5%. Interpretation During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, fewer than 10% of the US adult population formed antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, and fewer than 10% of those with antibodies were diagnosed. Public health efforts to limit SARS-CoV...

Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications

“…Seroprevalence estimates for two locations were excluded because the outbreak was still accelerating during the period when the specimens were being collected and from two other locations for which age-specific seroprevalence was not distinguishable from zero [27,[92][93][94]. Studies of non-representative samples were excluded as follows: 13 studies of blood donors; 5 studies of patients of hospitals, outpatient clinics, and dialysis centers; 4 studies with active recruitment of participants, and 6 narrow sample groups such as elementary schools [19,23,25,26,92,. Supplementary Appendix H lists all excluded studies.…”

“…For example, a study of U.K. dialysis patients found seroprevalence of about 36%, several times higher than that obtained using a very large random sample of the English population [21,22]. Similarly, a recent U.S. study found a seropositive rate of 34% for dialysis patients in New York state that was more than twice as high as the seroprevalence in a random sample of New York residents [10,23 Our critical review has also underscored the pitfalls of seroprevalence studies based on "convenience samples" of residual sera collected for other purposes. For example, two studies assessed seroprevalence of Utah residents during spring 2020.…”

Incidence and Clinical Impacts of COVID-19 Infection in Patients with Hemodialysis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 396,062 Hemodialysis Patients

“…Manganos et al, at a very early stage of the disease outbreak, used radiographic signs suggestive of interstitial pneumonia as surrogate criteria for COVID-19 disease [25]. A nationwide serology screening involving 28,503 HD patients in the US found that seroprevalence was 8.3%, standardizing with the US dialysis population [43]; however, serology data were largely unreported in non-Asian studies. All these differences may confer heterogeneity to the global incidence observed in the HD population.…”

Global perspective of COVID‐19 epidemiology for a full‐cycle pandemic

“…This applies both to people at high risk because of socioeconomic inequalities (eg, homeless, low-wage essential workers and minorities in the USA, poor urban dwellers and manual workers in Latin America), as well as age group and debilitation (eg, with massive infections in nursing homes in USA and Europe). Large seroprevalence studies with sufficient participants in different age strata to allow meaningful comparisons suggest that, compared with younger people, non-institutionalized people >65 years were equally likely to be infected in Spain, 59 slightly less likely to be infected in the USA, 46 and substantially less likely to be infected in England. 60 Moreover, as discussed above, minorities and poor people were often disproportionately infected.…”