Refine
Year of publication
- 2020 (9) (remove)
Language
- English (9)
Has Fulltext
- yes (9)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (9)
Keywords
- COVID-19 (2)
- SARS-CoV-2 (2)
- Acute HIV infection (1)
- Anti-CMV IgG (1)
- CMVepidemiology (1)
- Congenital CMVinfection (1)
- Cytomegalovirus (CMV) (1)
- ELISA (1)
- HIV (1)
- Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (1)
Institute
- Medizin (9)
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.
Characterization of neonates born to mothers with SARS-CoV-2 infection: review and meta-analysis
(2020)
Characterization of neonates born to mothers with SARS-CoV-2 infection has been partially carried out. There has been no systematic review providing a holistic neonatal presentation including possible vertical transmission. A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Google Scholar and Web of Science up to June, 6 2020. Studies on neonates born to mothers with SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. A binary random effect model was used for prevalence and 95% confidence interval. 32 studies involving 261 neonates were included in meta-analysis. Most neonates born to infected mothers did not show any clinical abnormalities (80.4%). Clinical features were dyspnea in 11 (42.3%) and fever in 9 newborns (19.1%). Of 261 neonates, 120 neonates were tested for infection, of whom 12 (10.0%) tested positive. Swabs from placenta, cord blood and vaginal secretion were negative. Neonates are mostly non affected by the mother's SARS-CoV-2 infection. The risk of vertical transmission is low.
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) serological assays are urgently needed for rapid diagnosis, contact tracing, and for epidemiological studies. So far, there is limited data on how commercially available tests perform with real patient samples, and if positive tested samples show neutralizing abilities. Focusing on IgG antibodies, we demonstrate the performance of two enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) assays (Euroimmun SARS‐CoV‐2 IgG and Vircell COVID‐19 ELISA IgG) in comparison to one lateral flow assay (FaStep COVID‐19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Device) and two in‐house developed assays (immunofluorescence assay [IFA] and plaque reduction neutralization test [PRNT]). We tested follow up serum/plasma samples of individuals polymerase chain reaction‐diagnosed with COVID‐19. Most of the SARS‐CoV‐2 samples were from individuals with moderate to the severe clinical course, who required an in‐patient hospital stay. For all examined assays, the sensitivity ranged from 58.8 to 76.5% for the early phase of infection (days 5‐9) and from 93.8% to 100% for the later period (days 10‐18).
Aim: Our aim was to analyse the diagnostic workup of hospitalised infants with symptoms of congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections.
Methods: This retrospective study was carried out at the University Hospital Frankfurt, Germany, from 2008 to 2017 on infants aged 4 weeks to 12 months presenting with neurological symptoms consistent with congenital CMV infections.
Results: We studied 117 infants, and workup data for CMV infections were available for 84%. Of these, 54% were immunoglobulin G‐ and immunoglobulin M‐seronegative for CMV or immunoglobulin G‐seropositive with no viral shedding. Congenital CMV infection was excluded in these cases. In 16%, the CMV workup was incomplete, precluding a definitive diagnosis. Dried blood spots (DBS) were requested from 30%. CMV polymerase chain reaction was negative in 19 of these 29 infants, and CMV deoxyribonucleic acid detection confirmed congenital CMV infections in six patients. DBS had been destroyed in line with German law in four cases. Congenital CMV infections were diagnosed (5%) or excluded (62%) in 67% of patients and unanswered in the remaining 33%.
Conclusion: Diagnoses of congenital CMV infections were widely considered and found in 5%. CMV was not stringently investigated in all patients or remained elusive due to German law on destroying DBS.
In resource-limited or point-of-care settings, rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs), that aim to simultaneously detect HIV antibodies and p24 capsid (p24CA) antigen with high sensitivity, can pose important alternatives to screen for early infections. We evaluated the performance of the antibody and antigen components of the old and novel version of the Determine™ HIV-1/2 Ag/Ab Combo RDTs in parallel to quantifications in a fourth-generation antigen/antibody immunoassay (4G-EIA), p24CA antigen immunoassay (p24CA-EIA), immunoblots, and nucleic acid quantification. We included plasma samples of acute, treatment-naïve HIV-1 infections (Fiebig stages I–VI, subtypes A1, B, C, F, CRF02_AG, CRF02_AE, URF) or chronic HIV-1 and HIV-2 infections. The tests’ antigen component was evaluated also for a panel of subtype B HIV-1 transmitted/founder (T/F) viruses, HIV-2 strains and HIV-2 primary isolates. Furthermore, we assessed the analytical sensitivity of the RDTs to detect p24CA using a highly purified HIV-1NL4-3 p24CA standard. We found that 77% of plasma samples from acutely infected, immunoblot-negative HIV-1 patients in Fiebig stages II–III were identified by the new RDT, while only 25% scored positive in the old RDT. Both RDTs reacted to all samples from chronically HIV-1-infected and acutely HIV-1-infected patients with positive immunoblots. All specimens from chronically infected HIV-2 patients scored positive in the new RDT. Of note, the sensitivity of the RDTs to detect recombinant p24CA from a subtype B virus ranged between 50 and 200 pg/mL, mirrored also by the detection of HIV-1 T/F viruses only at antigen concentrations tenfold higher than suggested by the manufacturer. The RTD failed to recognize any of the HIV-2 viruses tested. Our results indicate that the new version of the Determine™ HIV-1/2 Ag/Ab Combo displays an increased sensitivity to detect HIV-1 p24CA-positive, immunoblot-negative plasma samples compared to the precursor version. The sensitivity of 4G-EIA and p24CA-EIA to detect the major structural HIV antigen, and thus to diagnose acute infections prior to seroconversion, is still superior.
As the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic continues, serological assays are urgently needed for rapid diagnosis, contact tracing and for epidemiological studies. So far, there is little data on how commercially available tests perform with real patient samples and if detected IgG antibodies provide protective immunity. Focusing on IgG antibodies, we demonstrate the performance of two ELISA assays (Euroimmun SARS-CoV-2 IgG & Vircell COVID-19 ELISA IgG) in comparison to one lateral flow assay ((LFA) FaStep COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Device) and two in-house developed assays (immunofluorescence assay (IFA) and plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT)). We tested follow up serum/plasma samples of individuals PCR-diagnosed with COVID-19. Most of the SARS-CoV-2 samples were from individuals with moderate to severe clinical course, who required an in-patient hospital stay.
For all examined assays, the sensitivity ranged from 58.8 to 76.5% for the early phase of infection (days 5-9) and from 93.8 to 100% for the later period (days 10-18) after PCR-diagnosed with COVID-19. With exception of one sample, all positive tested samples in the analysed cohort, using the commercially available assays examined (including the in-house developed IFA), demonstrated neutralizing (protective) properties in the PRNT, indicating a potential protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2. Regarding specificity, there was evidence that samples of endemic coronavirus (HCoV-OC43, HCoV-229E) and Epstein Barr virus (EBV) infected individuals cross-reacted in the ELISA assays and IFA, in one case generating a false positive result (may giving a false sense of security). This need to be further investigated.
Oral swabs, sputum and blood samples from 18 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were examined using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing. Whereas oral swabs or sputum from the lower respiratory tract were tested RT-PCR positive in all patients, RNAemia was neither detected in 3 patients without symptoms nor in 14 patients with flu-like symptoms, fever or pneumonia. The only patient with RNAemia suffered from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and was artificially ventilated in an intensive care unit. Risk for SARS-CoV-2 transmission through blood components in asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals therefore seems negligible but further studies are needed.
Multicentre comparison of quantitative PCR-based assays to detect SARS-CoV-2, Germany, March 2020
(2020)
Containment strategies and clinical management of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients during the current pandemic depend on reliable diagnostic PCR assays for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Here, we compare 11 different RT-PCR test systems used in seven diagnostic laboratories in Germany in March 2020. While most assays performed well, we identified detection problems in a commonly used assay that may have resulted in false-negative test results during the first weeks of the pandemic.