Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies up to 25 April 2020 and public health implications

Saverio Caini; Federica Bellerba; Federica Corso; Angélica Díaz-Basabe; Gioacchino Natoli; John Paget; Federica Facciotti; Simone Pietro De Angelis; Sara Raimondi; Domenico Palli; Luca Mazzarella; Pier Giuseppe Pelicci; Paolo Vineis; Sara Gandini

doi:10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.23.2000980

Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies up to 25 April 2020 and public health implications

Saverio Caini, Federica Bellerba, Federica Corso, Angélica Díaz-Basabe, Gioacchino Natoli, John Paget, Federica Facciotti, Simone Pietro De Angelis, Sara Raimondi, Domenico Palli, Luca Mazzarella, Pier Giuseppe Pelicci, Paolo Vineis, Sara Gandini

Istituto Europeo di Oncologia

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

We reviewed the diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 serological tests. Random-effects models yielded a summary sensitivity of 82% for IgM, and 85% for IgG and total antibodies. For specificity, the pooled estimate were 98% for IgM and 99% for IgG and total antibodies. In populations with ≤ 5% of seroconverted individuals, unless the assays have perfect (i.e. 100%) specificity, the positive predictive value would be ≤ 88%. Serological tests should be used for prevalence surveys only in hard-hit areas.

Original language	English
Article number	2000980
Journal	Eurosurveillance
Volume	25
Issue number	23
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.23.2000980
Publication status	Published - Jun 11 2020

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Epidemiology
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Virology

Access to Document

10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.23.2000980

Cite this

Caini, S., Bellerba, F., Corso, F., Díaz-Basabe, A., Natoli, G., Paget, J., Facciotti, F., De Angelis, S. P., Raimondi, S., Palli, D., Mazzarella, L., Pelicci, P. G., Vineis, P., & Gandini, S. (2020). Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies up to 25 April 2020 and public health implications. Eurosurveillance, 25(23), [2000980]. https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.23.2000980

Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies up to 25 April 2020 and public health implications. / Caini, Saverio; Bellerba, Federica ; Corso, Federica ; Díaz-Basabe, Angélica ; Natoli, Gioacchino; Paget, John; Facciotti, Federica; De Angelis, Simone Pietro; Raimondi, Sara; Palli, Domenico; Mazzarella, Luca ; Pelicci, Pier Giuseppe; Vineis, Paolo; Gandini, Sara.

In: Eurosurveillance, Vol. 25, No. 23, 2000980, 11.06.2020.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Caini, S, Bellerba, F , Corso, F , Díaz-Basabe, A , Natoli, G, Paget, J, Facciotti, F, De Angelis, SP, Raimondi, S, Palli, D, Mazzarella, L , Pelicci, PG, Vineis, P & Gandini, S 2020, 'Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies up to 25 April 2020 and public health implications', Eurosurveillance, vol. 25, no. 23, 2000980. https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.23.2000980

Caini, Saverio ; Bellerba, Federica ; Corso, Federica ; Díaz-Basabe, Angélica ; Natoli, Gioacchino ; Paget, John ; Facciotti, Federica ; De Angelis, Simone Pietro ; Raimondi, Sara ; Palli, Domenico ; Mazzarella, Luca ; Pelicci, Pier Giuseppe ; Vineis, Paolo ; Gandini, Sara. / Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies up to 25 April 2020 and public health implications. In: Eurosurveillance. 2020 ; Vol. 25, No. 23.

@article{689c57c602134d1fab4ac8066a6e8366,

title = "Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies up to 25 April 2020 and public health implications",

abstract = "We reviewed the diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 serological tests. Random-effects models yielded a summary sensitivity of 82% for IgM, and 85% for IgG and total antibodies. For specificity, the pooled estimate were 98% for IgM and 99% for IgG and total antibodies. In populations with ≤ 5% of seroconverted individuals, unless the assays have perfect (i.e. 100%) specificity, the positive predictive value would be ≤ 88%. Serological tests should be used for prevalence surveys only in hard-hit areas.",

author = "Saverio Caini and Federica Bellerba and Federica Corso and Ang{\'e}lica D{\'i}az-Basabe and Gioacchino Natoli and John Paget and Federica Facciotti and {De Angelis}, {Simone Pietro} and Sara Raimondi and Domenico Palli and Luca Mazzarella and Pelicci, {Pier Giuseppe} and Paolo Vineis and Sara Gandini",

year = "2020",

month = jun,

day = "11",

doi = "10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.23.2000980",

language = "English",

volume = "25",

journal = "Eurosurveillance",

issn = "1560-7917",

publisher = "European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)",

number = "23",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies up to 25 April 2020 and public health implications

AU - Caini, Saverio

AU - Bellerba, Federica

AU - Corso, Federica

AU - Díaz-Basabe, Angélica

AU - Natoli, Gioacchino

AU - Paget, John

AU - Facciotti, Federica

AU - De Angelis, Simone Pietro

AU - Raimondi, Sara

AU - Palli, Domenico

AU - Mazzarella, Luca

AU - Pelicci, Pier Giuseppe

AU - Vineis, Paolo

AU - Gandini, Sara

PY - 2020/6/11

Y1 - 2020/6/11

N2 - We reviewed the diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 serological tests. Random-effects models yielded a summary sensitivity of 82% for IgM, and 85% for IgG and total antibodies. For specificity, the pooled estimate were 98% for IgM and 99% for IgG and total antibodies. In populations with ≤ 5% of seroconverted individuals, unless the assays have perfect (i.e. 100%) specificity, the positive predictive value would be ≤ 88%. Serological tests should be used for prevalence surveys only in hard-hit areas.

AB - We reviewed the diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 serological tests. Random-effects models yielded a summary sensitivity of 82% for IgM, and 85% for IgG and total antibodies. For specificity, the pooled estimate were 98% for IgM and 99% for IgG and total antibodies. In populations with ≤ 5% of seroconverted individuals, unless the assays have perfect (i.e. 100%) specificity, the positive predictive value would be ≤ 88%. Serological tests should be used for prevalence surveys only in hard-hit areas.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85086691716&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85086691716&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.23.2000980

DO - 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.23.2000980

M3 - Article

C2 - 32553061

AN - SCOPUS:85086691716

VL - 25

JO - Eurosurveillance

JF - Eurosurveillance

SN - 1560-7917

IS - 23

M1 - 2000980

ER -

Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies up to 25 April 2020 and public health implications

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this