Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hajissa K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9223681 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Hajissa Khalid K Islam Md Asiful MA Hassan Siti Asma SA Zaidah Abdul Rahman AR Ismail Nabilah N Mohamed Zeehaida Z
International journal of environmental research and public health 20220614 12
A reliable estimate of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies is increasingly important to track the spread of infection and define the true burden of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted with the objective of estimating the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Africa. A systematic search of the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar electronic databases was conducted. Thirty-five eligible studies were included. Using meta-analysis of prop ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:We estimated the seroprevalence of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies in residents of African countries and explored its associated factors. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, DOAJ and Google Scholar databases for peer reviewed articles and pre-prints that reported anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence of general or specific human populations resident in Africa. The eligible studies were evaluated using Joana Briggs Institute prevalence critical appraisal tool. Twenty-three studies involving 27,735 individuals were included in our paper. The pooled seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Africa was 22% (95%CI: 14-31) with very high heterogeneity (I2 = 100%, p < 0.001). Seroprevalence was highest in studies conducted in Central Africa compared to Southern Africa, West Africa, North Africa and East Africa respectively. The number of days between the first reported coronavirus disease 2019 case in each country and when a seroprevalence study was conducted was a significant moderator of seroprevalence. Seropositivity was numerically influenced by gender and age of the participants with males and those aged below 50 years being most affected with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The highest pooled seroprevalence in Africa reported in this review should be interpreted cautiously due to high heterogeneity between studies. Continued seroprevalence surveillance is warranted to establish Africa's transition towards herd immunity.
| S-EPMC8420234 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMany studies report the seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies. We aimed to synthesize seroprevalence data to better estimate the level and distribution of SARS-CoV-2 infection, identify high-risk groups, and inform public health decision making.MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched publication databases, preprint servers, and grey literature sources for seroepidemiological study reports, from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020. We included studies that reported a sample size, study date, location, and seroprevalence estimate. We corrected estimates for imperfect test accuracy with Bayesian measurement error models, conducted meta-analysis to identify demographic differences in the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and meta-regression to identify study-level factors associated with seroprevalence. We compared region-specific seroprevalence data to confirmed cumulative incidence. PROSPERO: CRD42020183634.ResultsWe identified 968 seroprevalence studies including 9.3 million participants in 74 countries. There were 472 studies (49%) at low or moderate risk of bias. Seroprevalence was low in the general population (median 4.5%, IQR 2.4-8.4%); however, it varied widely in specific populations from low (0.6% perinatal) to high (59% persons in assisted living and long-term care facilities). Median seroprevalence also varied by Global Burden of Disease region, from 0.6% in Southeast Asia, East Asia and Oceania to 19.5% in Sub-Saharan Africa (p<0.001). National studies had lower seroprevalence estimates than regional and local studies (p<0.001). Compared to Caucasian persons, Black persons (prevalence ratio [RR] 3.37, 95% CI 2.64-4.29), Asian persons (RR 2.47, 95% CI 1.96-3.11), Indigenous persons (RR 5.47, 95% CI 1.01-32.6), and multi-racial persons (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.60-2.24) were more likely to be seropositive. Seroprevalence was higher among people ages 18-64 compared to 65 and over (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.11-1.45). Health care workers in contact with infected persons had a 2.10 times (95% CI 1.28-3.44) higher risk compared to health care workers without known contact. There was no difference in seroprevalence between sex groups. Seroprevalence estimates from national studies were a median 18.1 times (IQR 5.9-38.7) higher than the corresponding SARS-CoV-2 cumulative incidence, but there was large variation between Global Burden of Disease regions from 6.7 in South Asia to 602.5 in Sub-Saharan Africa. Notable methodological limitations of serosurveys included absent reporting of test information, no statistical correction for demographics or test sensitivity and specificity, use of non-probability sampling and use of non-representative sample frames.DiscussionMost of the population remains susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Public health measures must be improved to protect disproportionately affected groups, including racial and ethnic minorities, until vaccine-derived herd immunity is achieved. Improvements in serosurvey design and reporting are needed for ongoing monitoring of infection prevalence and the pandemic response.
| S-EPMC8221784 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesCOVID-19 has been arguably the most important public health concern worldwide in 2020, and efforts are now escalating to suppress or eliminate its spread. In this study we undertook a meta-analysis to estimate the global and regional seroprevalence rates in humans of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and to assess whether seroprevalence is associated with geographical, climatic and/or sociodemographic factors.MethodsWe systematically reviewed PubMed, Scopus, Embase, medRxiv and bioRxiv databases for preprints or peer-reviewed articles (up to 14 August 2020). Study eligibility criteria were population-based studies describing the prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 (IgG and/or IgM) serum antibodies. Participants were people from different socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds (from the general population), whose prior COVID-19 status was unknown and who were tested for the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 serum antibodies. We used a random-effects model to estimate pooled seroprevalence, and then extrapolated the findings to the global population (for 2020). Subgroup and meta-regression analyses explored potential sources of heterogeneity in the data, and relationships between seroprevalence and sociodemographic, geographical and/or climatic factors.ResultsIn total, 47 studies involving 399 265 people from 23 countries met the inclusion criteria. Heterogeneity (I2 = 99.4%, p < 0.001) was seen among studies; SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in the general population varied from 0.37% to 22.1%, with a pooled estimate of 3.38% (95%CI 3.05-3.72%; 15 879/399 265). On a regional level, seroprevalence varied from 1.45% (0.95-1.94%, South America) to 5.27% (3.97-6.57%, Northern Europe), although some variation appeared to relate to the serological assay used. The findings suggested an association of seroprevalence with income levels, human development indices, geographic latitudes and/or climate. Extrapolating to the 2020 world population, we estimated that 263.5 million individuals had been exposed or infected at the time of this study.ConclusionsThis study showed that SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence varied markedly among geographic regions, as might be expected early in a pandemic. Longitudinal surveys to continually monitor seroprevalence around the globe will be critical to support prevention and control efforts, and might indicate levels of endemic stability or instability in particular countries and regions.
| S-EPMC7584920 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealth care workers (HCWs) represent a high risk population for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.AimTo determine the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among HCWs, and to find out the factors that are associated with this seroprevalence.MethodsThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were applied for this systematic review and meta-analysis. Databases including PubMed/MEDLINE and pre-print services (medR?iv and bioR?iv) were searched from inception up to August 24, 2020.FindingsForty-nine studies, including 127,480 HCWs met the inclusion criteria. The estimated overall seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among HCWs was 8.7% (95% CI: 6.7-10.9%). Seroprevalence was higher in studies that were conducted in North America (12.7%) compared to those in Europe (8.5%), Africa (8.2), and Asia (4%). Meta-regression showed that increased sensitivity of antibodies test was associated with increased seroprevalence. The following factors were associated with seropositivity: male gender, Black, Asian, and Hispanic HCWs, work in a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) unit, patient-related work, frontline health care workers, health care assistants, personal protective equipment shortage, self-reported belief for previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, previous positive polymerase chain reaction test, and household contact with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients.ConclusionThe seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among HCWs is high. Excellent adherence to infection prevention and control measures, sufficient and adequate personal protective equipment, and early recognition, identification and isolation of HCWs that are infected with SARS-CoV-2 are imperative to decrease the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
| S-EPMC7668234 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe higher hospitalisation rates of those aged 0-19 years (referred to herein as 'children') observed since the emergence of the immune-evasive SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant and subvariants, along with the persisting vaccination disparities highlighted a need for in-depth knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 sero-epidemiology in children. Here, we conducted this systematic review to assess SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and determinants in children worldwide.MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis study, we searched international and preprinted scientific databases from December 1, 2019 to July 10, 2022. Pooled seroprevalences were estimated according to World Health Organization (WHO) regions (at 95% confidence intervals, CIs) using random-effects meta-analyses. Associations with SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and sources of heterogeneity were investigated using sub-group and meta-regression analyses. The protocol used in this study has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022350833).FindingsWe included 247 studies involving 757,075 children from 70 countries. Seroprevalence estimates varied from 7.3% (5.8-9.1%) in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic to 37.6% (18.1-59.4%) in the fifth wave and 56.6% (52.8-60.5%) in the sixth wave. The highest seroprevalences in different pandemic waves were estimated for South-East Asia (17.9-81.8%) and African (17.2-66.1%) regions; while the lowest seroprevalence was estimated for the Western Pacific region (0.01-1.01%). Seroprevalence estimates were higher in children at older ages, in those living in underprivileged countries or regions, and in those of minority ethnic backgrounds.InterpretationOur findings indicate that, by the end of 2021 and before the Omicron wave, around 50-70% of children globally were still susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection, clearly emphasising the need for more effective vaccines and better vaccination coverage among children and adolescents, particularly in developing countries and minority ethnic groups.FundingNone.
| S-EPMC9795163 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIndia experienced 2 waves of COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 and reported the second highest caseload globally. Seroepidemiologic studies were done to track the course of the pandemic. We systematically reviewed and synthesized the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in the Indian population.MethodsWe included studies reporting seroprevalence of IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 from March 1, 2020 to August 11, 2021 and excluded studies done only among patients with COVID-19 and vaccinated individuals. We searched published databases, preprint servers, and government documents using a combination of keywords and medical subheading (MeSH) terms of "Seroprevalence AND SARS-CoV-2 AND India". We assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, the appraisal tool for cross-sectional studies (AXIS), the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tool, and WHO's statement on the Reporting of Seroepidemiological Studies for SARS-CoV-2 (ROSES-S). We calculated pooled seroprevalence along with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) during the first (March 2020 to February 2021) and second wave (March to August 2021). We also estimated seroprevalence by selected demographic characteristics.ResultsWe identified 3821 studies and included 53 studies with 905379 participants after excluding duplicates, screening of titles and abstracts and full-text screening. Of the 53, 20 studies were of good quality. Some of the reviewed studies did not report adequate information on study methods (sampling = 24% (13/53); laboratory = 83% [44/53]). Studies of 'poor' quality had more than one of the following issues: unjustified sample size, nonrepresentative sample, nonclassification of nonrespondents, results unadjusted for demographics and methods insufficiently explained to enable replication. Overall pooled seroprevalence was 20.7% in the first (95% CI = 16.1 to 25.3) and 69.2% (95% CI = 64.5 to 73.8) in the second wave. Seroprevalence did not differ by age in first wave, whereas in the second, it increased with age. Seroprevalence was slightly higher among women in the second wave. In both the waves, the estimate was higher in urban than in rural areas.ConclusionSeroprevalence increased by 3-fold between the 2 waves of the pandemic in India. Our review highlights the need for designing and reporting studies using standard protocols.
| S-EPMC8712428 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among health care workers (HCWs) provides information about the spread of COVID-19 within health care facilities, and the risk groups.ObjectivesWe aimed to describe the rate of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and its determinants among HCWs.Data sourcesWe used Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, MEDLINE, EBSCOhost and Cochrane Library.Study eligibility criteriaWe included the reports of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence with a sample size of minimum 1000 HCWs.MethodsThe study was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, no. CRD42021230456). We used PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. The keywords were "COVID-19", "SARS-CoV-2", "Coronavirus", "seroprevalence", "health care workers" and "risk factors".ResultsIn total 4329 reports were retrieved, duplications were removed; after filtering according to the title and abstract, 25 studies were selected. Risk of bias was assessed in 25 studies; it was low in 13 studies, medium in four studies, and high in eight studies. In meta-analysis using the random effect model, the weighted average of seroprevalence was calculated as 8% (95% CI 6-10%). The pooled seroprevalence rates of the selected variables that have a rate above the average were male HCWs with 9% (95% CI 7-11%); HCWs from ethnic minorities with 13% (95% CI 9-17%); high exposure 9% (95% CI 6-13%); exposure to the virus outside the health care setting 22% (95% CI 14-32%).ConclusionsOur analysis indicates a SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence rate of 8% among studies that included >1000 HCWs for the year 2020, before vaccinations started. The most common risk factors associated with higher seroprevalence rate were ethnicity, male gender and having a higher number of household contacts. Working as a frontline HCW was inconsistent in its association with higher seroprevalence.
| S-EPMC8186944 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aims and objectivesThis systematic review and meta-analysis reports the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among nurses.BackgroundWith a growing body of literature reporting the positive serology for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthcare workers, it remains unclear whether staff at the point of direct patient care are more prone to developing and transmitting the virus. Given nurses make up the majority of the global health workforce, outbreaks among these workers could severely undermine a health system's capability to manage the pandemic. We aimed to summarise and report the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among nurses globally.DesignSystematic review and meta-analyses.MethodsThis systematic review was developed, undertaken and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. We searched the electronic medical literature databases: MEDLINE; CINAHL; and EMBASE for studies reporting the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among nursing staff. Studies that reported nursing specific data were included in this review. Study quality was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for studies reporting prevalence data. Studies were stratified according to the World Health Organisation region classifications, and results were presented using forest plots and summary prevalence and variance was estimated using a random effects model.ResultsOur electronic search identified 1687 potential studies, of which 1148 were screened for eligibility after duplicates were removed, and 51 of the studies were included in our meta-analysis. The overall seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among nurses was estimated to be 8.1% (95% CI 6.9%-9.4%) among the 60,571 participants included in the studies. Seropositivity was highest in the African region (48.2%, 95% CI 39.2%-57.3%), followed by the European region (10.3%, 95% CI 8.0%-12.5%), the Region of the Americas (8.4%, 95% CI 6.0%-10.7%), the South-East Asia region (3.0%, 95% CI 0.00%-6.5%) and the Western Pacific region (0.5%, 95% CI 0.0%-1.0%). Pooled estimates were unable to be calculated in the Eastern Mediterranean region due to insufficient studies.ConclusionThe seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among nurses is comparable to other healthcare workers, and possibly similar to the general population. Early adoption and adherence to personal protective equipment and social distancing measures could explain these similarities, meaning the majority of staff contracted the virus through community transmission and not in a healthcare setting.Relevance to clinical practiceFear and uncertainty have been features of this pandemic, including among nurses. This meta-analysis should provide some comfort to nurses that risks are similar to community exposure when adequate PPE is available and there is an adherence to infection control measures.
| S-EPMC8661824 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants contain many mutations in its spike receptor-binding domain, the target of all authorized monoclonal antibodies (MAbs). Determining the extent to which Omicron variants reduced MAb susceptibility is critical to preventing and treating COVID-19. We systematically reviewed PubMed and three preprint servers, last updated 11 April 2022, for the in vitro activity of authorized MAbs against the Omicron variants. Fifty-one studies were eligible, including 50 containing Omicron BA.1 susceptibility data and 17 containing Omicron BA.2 susceptibility data. The first two authorized MAb combinations, bamlanivimab/etesevimab and casirivimab/imdevimab, were largely inactive against the Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 variants. In 34 studies, sotrovimab displayed a median 4.0-fold (interquartile range [IQR]: 2.6 to 6.9) reduction in activity against Omicron BA.1, and in 12 studies, it displayed a median 17-fold (IQR: 13 to 30) reduction in activity against Omicron BA.2. In 15 studies, the combination cilgavimab/tixagevimab displayed a median 86-fold (IQR: 27 to 151) reduction in activity against Omicron BA.1, and in six studies, it displayed a median 5.4-fold (IQR: 3.7 to 6.9) reduction in activity against Omicron BA.2. In eight studies against Omicron BA.1 and six studies against Omicron BA.2, bebtelovimab displayed no reduction in activity. Disparate results between assays were common. For authorized MAbs, 51/268 (19.0%) results for wild-type control variants and 78/348 (22.4%) results for Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 variants were more than 4-fold below or 4-fold above the median result for that MAb. Highly disparate results between published assays indicate a need for improved MAb susceptibility test standardization or interassay calibration. IMPORTANCE Monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) targeting the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein are among the most effective measures for preventing and treating COVID-19. However, SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants contain many mutations in their spike receptor-binding domains, the target of all authorized MAbs. Therefore, determining the extent to which Omicron variants reduced MAb susceptibility is critical to preventing and treating COVID-19. We identified 51 studies that reported the in vitro susceptibility of the two main Omicron variants BA.1 and BA.2 to therapeutic MAbs in advanced clinical development, including eight authorized individual MAbs and three authorized MAb combinations. We estimated the degree to which different MAbs displayed reduced activity against Omicron variants. The marked loss of activity of many MAbs against Omicron variants underscores the importance of developing MAbs that target conserved regions of spike. Highly disparate results between assays indicate the need for improved MAb susceptibility test standardization.
| S-EPMC9430471 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo describe and synthesise studies of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence by occupation prior to the widespread vaccine roll-out.MethodsWe identified studies of occupational seroprevalence from a living systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42020183634). Electronic databases, grey literature and news media were searched for studies published during January-December 2020. Seroprevalence estimates and a free-text description of the occupation were extracted and classified according to the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) 2010 system using a machine-learning algorithm. Due to heterogeneity, results were synthesised narratively.ResultsWe identified 196 studies including 591 940 participants from 38 countries. Most studies (n=162; 83%) were conducted locally versus regionally or nationally. Sample sizes were generally small (median=220 participants per occupation) and 135 studies (69%) were at a high risk of bias. One or more estimates were available for 21/23 major SOC occupation groups, but over half of the estimates identified (n=359/600) were for healthcare-related occupations. 'Personal Care and Service Occupations' (median 22% (IQR 9-28%); n=14) had the highest median seroprevalence.ConclusionsMany seroprevalence studies covering a broad range of occupations were published in the first year of the pandemic. Results suggest considerable differences in seroprevalence between occupations, although few large, high-quality studies were done. Well-designed studies are required to improve our understanding of the occupational risk of SARS-CoV-2 and should be considered as an element of pandemic preparedness for future respiratory pathogens.
| S-EPMC9979591 | biostudies-literature