Dataset Information

Antibody seroprevalence in the epicenter Wuhan, Hubei, and six selected provinces after containment of the first epidemic wave of COVID-19 in China.

ABSTRACT:

Background

China implemented containment measures to stop SARS-CoV-2 transmission in response to the COVID-19 epidemic. After the first epidemic wave, we conducted population-based serological surveys to determine extent of infection, risk factors for infection, and neutralization antibody levels to assess the real infections in the random sampled population.

Methods

We used a multistage, stratified cluster random sampling strategy to conduct serological surveys in three areas - Wuhan, Hubei Province outside Wuhan, and six provinces selected on COVID-19 incidence and containment strategy. Participants were consenting individuals >1 year old who resided in the survey area >14 days during the epidemic. Provinces screened sera for SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM, IgG, and total antibody by two lateral flow immunoassays and one magnetic chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay; positive samples were verified by micro-neutralization assay.

Findings

We enrolled 34,857 participants (overall response rate, 92%); 427 were positive by micro-neutralization assay. Wuhan had the highest weighted seroprevalence (4•43%, 95% confidence interval [95%CI]=3•48%-5•62%), followed by Hubei-ex-Wuhan (0•44%, 95%CI=0•26%-0•76%), and the other provinces (<0•1%). Living in Wuhan (adjusted odds ratio aOR=13•70, 95%CI= 7•91-23•75), contact with COVID-19 patients (aOR=7•35, 95%CI=5•05-10•69), and age over 40 (aOR=1•36, 95%CI=1•07-1•72) were significantly associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among seropositives, 101 (24%) reported symptoms and had higher geometric mean neutralizing antibody titers than among the 326 (76%) without symptoms (30±2•4 vs 15±2•1, p<0•001).

Interpretation

The low overall extent of infection and steep gradient of seropositivity from Wuhan to the outer provinces provide evidence supporting the success of containment of the first wave of COVID-19 in China. SARS-CoV-2 infection was largely asymptomatic, emphasizing the importance of active case finding and physical distancing. Virtually the entire population of China remains susceptible to SARS-CoV-2; vaccination will be needed for long-term protection.

Funding

This study was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology (2020YFC0846900) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82041026, 82041027, 82041028, 82041029, 82041030, 82041032, 82041033).

SUBMITTER: Li Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7864613 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:As of 16 May 2020, more than 4.5 million cases and more than 300,000 deaths from disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been reported. Reliable estimates of mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection are essential for understanding clinical prognosis, planning healthcare capacity, and epidemic forecasting. The case-fatality ratio (CFR), calculated from total numbers of reported cases and reported deaths, is the most commonly reported metric, but it can be a misleading measure of overall mortality. The objectives of this study were to (1) simulate the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 using publicly available surveillance data and (2) infer estimates of SARS-CoV-2 mortality adjusted for biases and examine the CFR, the symptomatic case-fatality ratio (sCFR), and the infection-fatality ratio (IFR) in different geographic locations. METHOD AND FINDINGS:We developed an age-stratified susceptible-exposed-infected-removed (SEIR) compartmental model describing the dynamics of transmission and mortality during the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic. Our model accounts for two biases: preferential ascertainment of severe cases and right-censoring of mortality. We fitted the transmission model to surveillance data from Hubei Province, China, and applied the same model to six regions in Europe: Austria, Bavaria (Germany), Baden-Württemberg (Germany), Lombardy (Italy), Spain, and Switzerland. In Hubei, the baseline estimates were as follows: CFR 2.4% (95% credible interval [CrI] 2.1%-2.8%), sCFR 3.7% (3.2%-4.2%), and IFR 2.9% (2.4%-3.5%). Estimated measures of mortality changed over time. Across the six locations in Europe, estimates of CFR varied widely. Estimates of sCFR and IFR, adjusted for bias, were more similar to each other but still showed some degree of heterogeneity. Estimates of IFR ranged from 0.5% (95% CrI 0.4%-0.6%) in Switzerland to 1.4% (1.1%-1.6%) in Lombardy, Italy. In all locations, mortality increased with age. Among individuals 80 years or older, estimates of the IFR suggest that the proportion of all those infected with SARS-CoV-2 who will die ranges from 20% (95% CrI 16%-26%) in Switzerland to 34% (95% CrI 28%-40%) in Spain. A limitation of the model is that count data by date of onset are required, and these are not available in all countries. CONCLUSIONS:We propose a comprehensive solution to the estimation of SARS-Cov-2 mortality from surveillance data during outbreaks. The CFR is not a good predictor of overall mortality from SARS-CoV-2 and should not be used for evaluation of policy or comparison across settings. Geographic differences in IFR suggest that a single IFR should not be applied to all settings to estimate the total size of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in different countries. The sCFR and IFR, adjusted for right-censoring and preferential ascertainment of severe cases, are measures that can be used to improve and monitor clinical and public health strategies to reduce the deaths from SARS-CoV-2 infection.