Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (31)
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Preprint (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (35) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (35)
Keywords
- SARS-CoV-2 (9)
- PCR (7)
- COVID-19 (6)
- HBV (2)
- HCV (2)
- Viruslast (2)
- cell culture (2)
- influenza (2)
- out-patient paediatrics (2)
- respiratory tract infection (2)
- Acute HIV infection (1)
- Ag-RDT (1)
- Anti-CMV IgG (1)
- Antibody detection (1)
- Antigen (1)
- Antikörper (1)
- Antikörpernachweis (1)
- Assay variation (1)
- Autopsy (1)
- B.1.1.7 (1)
- Blutspenderscreening (1)
- Brain metastasis (1)
- CD74 (1)
- CMVepidemiology (1)
- COBAS Taqman (1)
- Chlamydia-Infections/urine (1)
- Chlamydieninfektionen/Urin (1)
- Congenital CMVinfection (1)
- Cytomegalovirus (CMV) (1)
- DNA, Virale/Blut (1)
- Donor screening (1)
- Forensic medicine (1)
- Genamplifikation (1)
- Gene-Amplification (1)
- HBV reactivation (1)
- HBsAg (1)
- HCV treatment (1)
- HCV-Core-Antigen (1)
- HEV (1)
- HIV (1)
- HIV-1 Genotypisierung (1)
- HIV-1 genotyping (1)
- HIV-Infektionen (1)
- HLA class II (1)
- HLA peptidome (1)
- Health care workers (1)
- Hepatitis B (1)
- Hepatitis C (1)
- Hepatitis C-Virus (HCV) (1)
- Hepatitis C; DNA (1)
- HlV-Infections (1)
- Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (1)
- Immunenzymtechniken (1)
- Immunoenzyme Techniques (1)
- Influenza (1)
- Isolierung (1)
- Labordiagnose (1)
- Labordiagnostik (1)
- Medical history (1)
- N501Y (1)
- NAT (1)
- Nukleinsäure-Amplifikationstechnik (NAT) (1)
- Nukleinsäureamplifikationstest (NAT) (1)
- Oberflächenantigen-Mutante (1)
- Otorhinolaryngological (1)
- POCT (1)
- Pandemic (1)
- Parainfluenza (1)
- Pathology (1)
- Pneumonia (1)
- Post mortem examination (1)
- RNA (1)
- RNA, Virale/ Blut (1)
- RT-PCR (1)
- Rapid diagnostic test (1)
- ReagentKits, -Diagnostic (1)
- Reagenzkits, Diagnostische (1)
- RealTime (1)
- Resistenztestung (1)
- Respiratory syncytial virus (1)
- Sensitivity and Specificity (1)
- Sensitivität und Spezifität (1)
- Seroconverter (1)
- Serodiagnosis (1)
- Serodiagnostik (1)
- Serology (1)
- Seroprevalence (1)
- Superinfection (1)
- Therapiemonitoring (1)
- TruGene (1)
- Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (1)
- Upper respiratory tract infection (1)
- Urethra/Mikrobiologie (1)
- Urethra/microbiology (1)
- Variation (Genetics) (1)
- Variation (Genetik) (1)
- Viral Load (1)
- Viral load (1)
- Viral/blood (1)
- Viral/blood; RNA (1)
- ViroSeq (1)
- Virological testing (1)
- Zellkultur (1)
- anti-HBc (1)
- antibody (1)
- antigen (1)
- bDNA; Hepatitis C-Virus (HCV) (1)
- blood donor screening (1)
- co-infection (1)
- core antigen (1)
- core expression (1)
- coronavirus (1)
- diagnostic test (1)
- diagnostic window (1)
- diagnostisches Fenster (1)
- direct-acting antivirals (1)
- gargle lavage (1)
- genetic diversity (1)
- genotype G (1)
- hepatitis B virus (1)
- hepatitis C virus (1)
- hepatitis C virus (HCV) (1)
- hepatitis C-virus (HCV) (1)
- hepatitis E (1)
- immunosuppression (1)
- infectivity (1)
- isolation (1)
- laboratory diagnosis (1)
- laboratory diagnostics (1)
- long-term follow-up (1)
- molecular surveillance (1)
- nasal swab (1)
- natural selection (1)
- nucleic acid amplification test(NAT) (1)
- nucleic acid amplification test (NAT) (1)
- prevalence (1)
- qRT-PCR detection (1)
- resistance testing (1)
- respiratorische Infektion (1)
- respiratory infection (1)
- saliva (1)
- self-collected samples (1)
- serology (1)
- spike mutation (1)
- surface antigen mutant (1)
- test protocol (1)
- therapy monitoring (1)
- viral load (1)
Institute
Die 1990 eingeführten ersten kommerziellen HCV-Antikörper-Screening Tests wurden im Laufe der Jahre bezüglich ihrer Sensitivität und Spezifität erheblich verbessert. Inzwischen sind auch standardisierte Verfahren zum qualitativen und quantitativen HCV-RNA-Nachweis verfügbar, die Dank der Einführung eines internationalen Standards miteinander vergleichbar sind. Aber auch mittels Antigen-ELISA ist es möglich, die im Patientenblut zirkulierende Virusmenge zu quantifizieren. Einer der Hauptübertragungswege – Bluttransfusion und Blutprodukte – der HCV-Infektion wurde durch die Verbesserung der virologischen Diagnostik nahezu eliminiert. Inzwischen sind i. v.-Drogenabhängige die Hauptrisikogruppe für eine HCV-Infektion. Bislang nur zu Forschungszwecken etablierte Methoden zur Messung der zellulären Immunität oder auch die Messung neutralisierender Antikörper könnten zum Beispiel im Rahmen einer Impfstoffentwicklung an Bedeutung gewinnen.
Der Nachweis von Chlamydia trachomatis Genomsequenzen ist seit einigen Jahren mit Hilfe kommerzieller Testkits, welche auf dem Prinzip der Polymerase-Ketten-Reaktion (PCR) oder Ligase-Kettenreaktion (LCR) beruhen, möglich. Vor kurzem wurde ein neues Verfahren, die Transcription Mediated Amplification (TMA), etabliert. In der vorliegenden Studie wurden drei Nukleinsäure Amplifikations-Techniken, die PCR, die LCR und die TMA für den Nachweis von Chlamydia trachomatis aus Urinproben miteinander bezüglich Sensitivität und Spezifität verglichen und einem Enzym-Immuno-Assay (EIA) zum C. trachomatis-Antigen-Nachweis aus endozervikalen Abstrichen gegenübergestellt. PCR, LCR und TMA zeigten eine vergleichbare Sensitivität und Spezifität. Diskrepante Ergebnisse ergaben sich im Vergleich mit dem C. trachomatis-Antigen-Nachweis. In 22 Abstrichen war Chlamydien-Antigen nachzuweisen. Nur bei 12 bzw. 11 der untersuchten Prostituierten konnten bei positivem zervikalen Abstrich Chlamydia trachomatis Genomsequenzen im Urin nachgewiesen werden. Bei 5 bzw. 4 Frauen wurde bei negativem Abstrichbefund C. trachomatis DNA bzw. RNA im Urin gefunden. Um bei Frauen eine hohe diagnostische Sensitivität zu erreichen, .sollten Urin und endozervikale Abstriche untersucht werden, da C. trachomatis nicht immer in beiden Probematerialien nachweisbar ist.
Purpose: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) replicates predominantly in the upper respiratory tract and is primarily transmitted by droplets and aerosols. Taking the medical history for typical COVID-19 symptoms and PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 testing have become established as screening procedures. The aim of this work was to describe the clinical appearance of SARS-CoV-2-PCR positive patients and to determine the SARS-CoV-2 contact risk for health care workers (HCW).
Methods: The retrospective study included n = 2283 SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests from n = 1725 patients with otorhinolaryngological (ORL) diseases performed from March to November 2020 prior to inpatient treatment. In addition, demographic data and medical history were assessed.
Results: n = 13 PCR tests (0.6%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The positive rate showed a significant increase during the observation period (p < 0.01). None of the patients had clinical symptoms that led to a suspected diagnosis of COVID-19 before PCR testing. The patients were either asymptomatic (n = 4) or had symptoms that were interpreted as symptoms typical of the ORL disease or secondary diagnoses (n = 9).
Conclusion: The identification of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients is a considerable challenge in clinical practice. Our findings illustrate that taking a medical history alone is of limited value and cannot replace molecular SARS-CoV-2 testing, especially for patients with ORL diseases. Our data also demonstrate that there is a high probability of contact with SARS-CoV-2-positive patients in everyday clinical practice, so that the use of personal protective equipment, even in apparently “routine cases”, is highly recommended.
Human cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in patient groups at risk. We have previously shown that the anti-CMV IgG seroprevalence in an urban region of Germany has changed over the last decades. Overall, a decline from 63.7 to 57.25% had been observed between 1988–1997 and 1998–2008 (p < 0,001). Here, we continuously follow the trends to the most recent decade 2009 to 2018. In a retrospective analysis, we determined the seroprevalence of CMV IgG antibodies in our patient cohort, stratified by gender and selected groups at risk (e.g., patients with HIV infection; women of childbearing age). The overall prevalence of anti-CMV IgG non-significantly declined further from 57.25% in 1998–2008 to 56.48% in 2009–2018 (p = 0.881). Looking at gender differences, overall CMV seroprevalence in males declined to 52.82% (from 55.54% in 1998–2008; p = 0.0254), while it non-significantly increased in females to 59.80%. The high seroprevalence in patients with a known HIV infection further increased from 87.46% in 1998–2008 to 92.93% in the current period (p = 0.9999). In women of childbearing age, no significant changes over the last three decades could be observed. The CMV seroprevalence in oncological patients was determined to be 60.64%. Overall, the former significant decline of CMV seroprevalence between the decades 1988–1997 and 1998–2008 in this urban region of Germany slowed down to a non-significant decrease of 0.77% (1998–2008 vs. 2009–2018). This might be an indicator that CMV seroprevalence has reached a plateau.
Due to globally rising numbers of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections, resources for real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR)-based testing have been exhausted. In order to meet the demands of testing and reduce transmission, SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) are being considered. These tests are fast, inexpensive, and simple to use, but whether they detect potentially infectious cases has not been well studied. We evaluated three lateral flow assays (RIDA®QUICK SARS-CoV-2 Antigen (R-Biopharm), SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test (Roche)), and NADAL® COVID-19 Ag Test (Nal von Minden GmbH, Regensburg, Germany) and one microfluidic immunofluorescence assay (SARS-CoV-2 Ag Test (LumiraDx GmbH, Cologne, Germany)) using 100 clinical samples. Diagnostic rRT-PCR and cell culture testing as a marker for infectivity were performed in parallel. The overall Ag-RDT sensitivity for rRT-PCR-positive samples ranged from 24.3% to 50%. However, for samples with a viral load of more than 6 log10 RNA copies/mL (22/100), typically seen in infectious individuals, Ag-RDT positivity was between 81.8% and 100%. Only 51.6% (33/64) of the rRT-PCR-positive samples were infectious in cell culture. In contrast, three Ag-RDTs demonstrated a more significant correlation with cell culture infectivity (61.8–82.4%). Our findings suggest that large-scale SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT-based testing can be considered for detecting potentially infective individuals and reducing the virus spread.
Although a variety of genetic strategies have been developed to inhibit HIV replication, few direct comparisons of the efficacy of these inhibitors have been carried out. Moreover, most studies have not examined whether genetic inhibitors are able to induce a survival advantage that results in an expansion of genetically-modified cells following HIV infection. We evaluated the efficacy of three leading genetic strategies to inhibit HIV replication: 1) an HIV-1 tat/rev-specific small hairpin (sh) RNA; 2) an RNA antisense gene specific for the HIV-1 envelope; and 3) a viral entry inhibitor, maC46. In stably transduced cell lines selected such that >95% of cells expressed the genetic inhibitor, the RNA antisense envelope and viral entry inhibitor maC46 provided the strongest inhibition of HIV-1 replication. However, when mixed populations of transduced and untransduced cells were challenged with HIV-1, the maC46 fusion inhibitor resulted in highly efficient positive selection of transduced cells, an effect that was evident even in mixed populations containing as few as 1% maC46-expressing cells. The selective advantage of the maC46 fusion inhibitor was also observed in HIV-1-infected cultures of primary T lymphocytes as well as in HIV-1-infected humanized mice. These results demonstrate robust inhibition of HIV replication with the fusion inhibitor maC46 and the antisense Env inhibitor, and importantly, a survival advantage of cells expressing the maC46 fusion inhibitor both in vitro and in vivo. Evaluation of the ability of genetic inhibitors of HIV-1 replication to confer a survival advantage on genetically-modified cells provides unique information not provided by standard techniques that may be important in the in vivo efficacy of these genes.
Background: International travel is a major driver of the introduction and spread of SARS- CoV-2. Aim: To investigate SARS-CoV-2 genetic diversity in the region of a major transport hub in Germany, we characterized the viral sequence diversity of the SARS-CoV-2 variants circulating in Frankfurt am Main, the city with the largest airport in Germany, from the end of October to the end of December 2020. Methods: In total, we recovered 136 SARS-CoV-2 genomes from nasopharyngeal swab samples. We isolated 104 isolates that were grown in cell culture and RNA from the recovered viruses and subjected them to full-genome sequence analysis. In addition, 32 nasopharyngeal swab samples were directly sequenced. Results and conclusion: We found 28 different lineages of SARS- CoV-2 circulating during the study period, including the variant of concern B.1.1.7 (∆69/70, N501Y). Six of the lineages had not previously been observed in Germany. We detected the spike protein (S) deletion ∆69/∆70 in 15% of all sequences, a four base pair (bp) deletion (in 2.9% of sequences) and a single bp deletion (in 0.7% of sequences) in ORF3a, leading to ORF3a truncations. In four sequences (2.9%), an amino acid deletion at position 210 in S was identified. In a single sample (0.7%), both a 9 bp deletion in ORF1ab and a 7 bp deletion in ORF7a were identified. One sequence in lineage B.1.1.70 had an N501Y substitution while lacking the ∆69/70 in S. The high diversity of sequences observed over two months in Frankfurt am Main highlights the persisting need for continuous SARS-CoV-2 surveillance using full-genome sequencing, particularly in cities with international airport connections.
Background: To minimize the risk of disease transmission in cornea transplantation, donor screening for blood-derived viral infections is mandatory. Ideally, pre-mortem blood samples are used, but based on availability, cadaveric blood samples of cornea donors may also be used. However, serological and nucleic acid amplification tests (NATs) need to be validated for the use of cadaveric specimens.
Methods: Hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), human T-lymphotropic virus (HTLV) 1/2, and Treponema pallidum (syphilis)-specific serological and/or NAT assays were validated on different platforms (Abbott Alinity i, Alinity m, Roche Cobas 6800, and Roche Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan (CAP/CTM)) using (un)spiked paired pre- and post-mortem cornea donor blood samples from the same individual (up to 23.83 h after death) of 28 individuals in accordance with the specifications of the German Federal Institute for Vaccines and Biomedicines (Paul-Ehrlich-Institut [PEI]). In addition, routinely HBV-, HCV- and HIV-PCR-negative tested post-mortem blood samples of 24 individuals were used to assess NAT specificity.
Results: For the majority of serological parameters on the Abbott Alinity i (HBsAg, anti-HBc, anti-HBs, anti-HCV, anti-HIV, anti-HTLV 1/2, and anti-Treponema pallidum), ratios of generated test results of (un)spiked paired pre- and post-mortem blood samples differed ≤25%, with an agreement of qualitative pre- and post-mortem test results ranging from 91.2 to 100%. For NAT parameters (HBV, HCV, and HIV) on the Cobas 6800, Alinity m, and CAP/CTM, no significant deviation in virus concentrations (factor >5) of spiked pre- and post-mortem blood samples could be observed. Ct-values of corresponding internal controls did also not differ significantly (>1.5 Ct-values). In addition, no false-positive test results were generated when specificity was assessed.
Conclusion: Overall, fluctuations of test results for serological and NAT parameters in pre- and post-mortem blood samples examined in this study, were only limited and within the range of what is also observed when routinely testing fresh patient specimens. We conclude that all examined assays are eligible for the screening of blood samples taken up to about 24 h after the occurrence of death.
Testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by RT-PCR is a vital public health tool in the pandemic. Self-collected samples are increasingly used as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs. Several studies suggested that they are sufficiently sensitive to be a useful alternative. However, there are limited data directly comparing several different types of self-collected materials to determine which material is preferable. A total of 102 predominantly symptomatic adults with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection self-collected native saliva, a tongue swab, a mid-turbinate nasal swab, saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad and gargle lavage, within 48 h of initial diagnosis. Sample collection was unsupervised. Both native saliva and gargling with tap water had high diagnostic sensitivity of 92.8% and 89.1%, respectively. Nasal swabs had a sensitivity of 85.1%, which was not significantly inferior to saliva (p = 0.092), but 16.6% of participants reported they had difficult in self-collection of this sample. A tongue swab and saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad had a significantly lower sensitivity of 74.2% and 70.2%, respectively. Diagnostic sensitivity was not related to the presence of clinical symptoms or to age. When comparing self-collected specimens from different material, saliva, gargle lavage or mid-turbinate nasal swabs may be considered for most symptomatic patients. However, complementary experiments are required to verify that differences in performance observed among the five sampling modes were not attributed to collection impairment.