Population-based serosurveys for SARS-CoV-2 transmission 2021-2022, Massachusetts USA

preprint OA: closed
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

Background SARS-CoV-2 has been responsible for extensive morbidity and mortality in Massachusetts, especially from 2021 – 2022. The true burden of infection is unknown as official reporting data during 2021 and 2022 was not able to capture subclinical/asymptomatic infections nor the results from home-based lateral flow tests (LFTs). Aim This study was designed to better characterize the exposure of Massachusetts residents to SARS-CoV-2, and to understand demographic and behavioral factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 exposure during the highest burden years of the pandemic. Methods A series of five sequential state-wide serosurveys were conducted with oversampling for underrepresented demographic groups from June 2021 to September 2022. These mail-based, repeated cross-sectional surveys (RCSs) captured data at periods of rapid vaccine uptake when different viral variants were predominant. This study also included collection of at-home nasal swabs for PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 virological testing, and collection of dried blood spot cards for ELISA-based testing of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody markers including spike and capsid, reported as seroprevelences. Neutralizing antibodies to spike-RBD were also measured. Results Of the randomly selected 249,000 Massachusetts households invited to participate in this survey, a total of 2,220 participants completed the demographic questionnaire and submitted valid specimens for analysis. Of these participants, ten were PCR-positive for SARS-CoV-2 at time of survey. Across all five repeated cross-sectional surveys (RCS), spike antibody positivity ranged from 83.1% to 96.4%. Additionally, levels of the spike neutralizing antibody increased with each RCS; point prevalence values ranged from 20.5% in RCS 1 and 2 to 73.5% in RCS 5. Using weighted data, the seroprevalence of capsid remained relatively constant throughout the RCSs except for RCS 3. Multivariable regression results found a positive association between vaccination status and markers of SARS-CoV-2 exposure; individuals who had been vaccinated were more likely to be seropositive for all markers. Factors including race, age, income, and occupation did not show any statistically significant associations with serostatus. Conclusions This survey indicates that while there was an increase in antibodies to spike protein and to associated neutralizing antibodies over time, there were no differences in neutralizing antibodies by socio-demographic factors, suggesting no major health disparities existed at the time of surveys in either vaccine coverage or infection-related antibody titers across the state. Response rates were higher among some demographic groups (Caucasians, households with a high income, and women), thus, oversampling and weighting allowed estimates of the larger Massachusetts population. Our findings that there were no statistically significant differences in neutralizing antibodies across demographic groups suggesting all groups were similarly protected from SARS-CoV-2 infection. These results highlight the success of Massachusetts in protecting individuals across all demographics.
Full text 4,891 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 4 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Background SARS-CoV-2 has been responsible for extensive morbidity and mortality in Massachusetts, especially from 2021 – 2022. The true burden of infection is unknown as official reporting data during 2021 and 2022 was not able to capture subclinical/asymptomatic infections nor the results from home-based lateral flow tests (LFTs). Aim This study was designed to better characterize the exposure of Massachusetts residents to SARS-CoV-2, and to understand demographic and behavioral factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 exposure during the highest burden years of the pandemic.

Methods

A series of five sequential state-wide serosurveys were conducted with oversampling for underrepresented demographic groups from June 2021 to September 2022. These mail-based, repeated cross-sectional surveys (RCSs) captured data at periods of rapid vaccine uptake when different viral variants were predominant. This study also included collection of at-home nasal swabs for PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 virological testing, and collection of dried blood spot cards for ELISA-based testing of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody markers including spike and capsid, reported as seroprevelences. Neutralizing antibodies to spike-RBD were also measured.

Results

Of the randomly selected 249,000 Massachusetts households invited to participate in this survey, a total of 2,220 participants completed the demographic questionnaire and submitted valid specimens for analysis. Of these participants, ten were PCR-positive for SARS-CoV-2 at time of survey. Across all five repeated cross-sectional surveys (RCS), spike antibody positivity ranged from 83.1% to 96.4%. Additionally, levels of the spike neutralizing antibody increased with each RCS; point prevalence values ranged from 20.5% in RCS 1 and 2 to 73.5% in RCS 5. Using weighted data, the seroprevalence of capsid remained relatively constant throughout the RCSs except for RCS 3. Multivariable regression results found a positive association between vaccination status and markers of SARS-CoV-2 exposure; individuals who had been vaccinated were more likely to be seropositive for all markers. Factors including race, age, income, and occupation did not show any statistically significant associations with serostatus.

Conclusions

This survey indicates that while there was an increase in antibodies to spike protein and to associated neutralizing antibodies over time, there were no differences in neutralizing antibodies by socio-demographic factors, suggesting no major health disparities existed at the time of surveys in either vaccine coverage or infection-related antibody titers across the state. Response rates were higher among some demographic groups (Caucasians, households with a high income, and women), thus, oversampling and weighting allowed estimates of the larger Massachusetts population. Our findings that there were no statistically significant differences in neutralizing antibodies across demographic groups suggesting all groups were similarly protected from SARS-CoV-2 infection. These results highlight the success of Massachusetts in protecting individuals across all demographics. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. Funding Statement This study was funded by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: Ethics committee/IRB of the University of Massachusetts Amherst gave ethical approval for this work (Approval #2664; date, April 8, 2021). I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes Footnotes Updated list of authors and figures 1, 2 and 5. Data Availability All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00