Search

Background: Diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis (LB) relies on clinical symptoms and detection of Borrelia-specific antibodies. Guidelines recommend a two-tier testing (TTT) strategy for disseminated LB: serological screening with a sensitive enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and confirmation with a specific immunoblot. Searching for the most sensitive and specific approach, this retrospective study evaluated standard (STTT) and modified (MTTT) strategies using a well-defined study population. Methods: Cases included patients with active Lyme neuroborreliosis (LNB; n = 29) or Lyme arthritis (LA; n = 17). Controls comprised patients treated for LNB (n = 36) or LA (n = 8), healthy individuals who were either untreated (n = 75) or treated for LB (n = 15) in the past, and patients with potentially cross-reactive diseases (n = 16). Sera were subjected to three EIAs and two immunoblots. Reactive screening results were confirmed by immunoblot (STTT) or EIA (MTTT). Solitary IgM results in the screening assay and effects of antibiotic treatment on isotype-specific seropositivity rates were also assessed. Results: Sensitivities of STTT strategies ranged from 90%–97% for LNB and were 100% for LA. MTTT strategies were 100% sensitive. Specificities ranged from 89%–95% for STTT and from 88%–93% for MTTT strategies. Differences between STTT and MTTT strategies were not statistically significant. Solitary IgM reactivity was common among controls. Antibiotic treatment significantly reduced IgM/IgG positivity for LNB patients; for LA patients, a decline was only observed for IgM. Conclusion: In conclusion, MTTT strategies showed a slightly higher sensitivity and similar specificity compared to STTT strategies. Since EIAs are more time- and cost-efficient, MTTT strategies seem more favorable for clinical use. IgG testing enhances specificity with minimal sensitivity loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bryostatin-1 belongs to the family of macrocyclic lactones isolated from the marine bryozoan Bugula neritina and is a potent activator of protein kinase C (PKC). Bryostatin has been demonstrated to possess both in vivo and in vitro anti-leukaemic potential. In samples derived from chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) patients, it has been demonstrated that bryostatin-1 induces a macrophage differentiation, suppresses colony growth in vitro and promotes cytokine secretion from accessory cells. We investigated the effect of bryostatin-1 treatment on colony-forming unit-granulocyte macrophage (CFU-GM) capacity in the presence of accessory cells, using mononuclear cells, as well as in the absence of accessory cells using purified CD34-positive cells. Cells were obtained from 14 CML patients as well as from nine controls. Moreover, CD34-positive cells derived from CML samples and controls were analysed for stem cell frequency and ability using the long-term culture initiating cell (LTCIC) assay at limiting dilution. Individual colonies derived from both the CFU-GM and LTCIC assays were analysed for the presence of the bcr-abl gene with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to evaluate inhibition of malignant colony growth. The results show that at the CFU-GM level bryostatin-1 treatment resulted in only a 1.4-fold higher reduction of CML colony growth as compared to the control samples, both in the presence and in the absence of accessory cells. However, at the LTCIC level a sixfold higher reduction of CML growth was observed as compared to the control samples. Analysis of the LTCICs at limiting dilution indicates that this purging effect is caused by a decrease in output per malignant LTCIC combined with an increase in the normal stem cell frequency. It is concluded that bryostatin-1 selectively inhibits CML growth at the LTCIC level and should be explored as a purging modality in CML. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The discovery of the Philadelphia chromosome and its consistent involvement in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) was the first time that a relationship between a cytogenetic abnormality and malignancy was demonstrated. This review will try to provide an insight into the molecular mechanisms underlying this disease and outline the therapeutical options for patients with CML. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the mobilization and harvesting of Philadelphia chromosome-negative progenitors has been proven feasible by a number of groups, it is not clear which techniques should be used with regard to the monitoring of purging and evaluation of stem cell yield. Therefore, we isolated CD34-positive cells from leukapheresis samples of seven CML patients after induction therapy. These cells were analyzed using the colony-forming unit granulocyte–macrophage (CFU-GM) and long-term culture-initiating cell (LTCIC) assays. In addition, we analyzed frequency and clonogenicity of single stem cells using the LTCIC assay at limiting dilution. Individual colonies derived from these assays were subsequently analyzed for the presence of the bcr-abl gene with interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and for the presence of bcr-abl mRNA with RT-PCR. We compared these results with the cytogenetic analysis of the leukapheresis material. Molecular analysis of individual colonies correlated well with the results of cytogenetic analysis. However, in nine out of 18 samples, cytogenetic analysis exclusively demonstrated the presence of either Philadelphia chromosome-positive or -negative cells whereas with the molecular analysis of individual colonies tumor contamination or the presence of residual normal cells could be substantiated. We concluded that molecular analysis of individual colonies should be employed to further optimize induction protocols. With regard to stem cell mobilization we demonstrated that about 67 CFU-GM colonies and clusters were generated by one single LTCIC both for the CML samples and the samples obtained from patients with non-hematologic malignancy. This number is important since until now most centres use a number of four colonies and clusters generated by one LTCIC. Dividing the CFU-GM output in the LTCIC assay by four to determine LTCIC frequency could thus lead to an almost 20-fold overestimation of the LTCIC frequency. It is concluded... [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, we evaluated the effect of hyperthermia on hematopoietic progenitors from six chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) bone marrow (BM) samples at diagnosis and four peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) samples from CML patients after stem cell mobilisation. CD34-positive cells, isolated from these samples, were incubated for 2 h at 37, 42 or 43 degrees C and were plated in the colony-forming unit granulocyte-macrophage (CFU-GM) and the long-term culture initiating cell (LTCIC) assay. To evaluate purging, individual colonies from these assays were analyzed for the presence of the bcr-abl gene with interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and/or RT-PCR. BM samples showed a significant higher sensitivity both at the CFU-GM and LTCIC level, after treatment at 42 degrees C, as compared to the control BM samples obtained from healthy volunteers. The four BM samples of CML patients with a low leukocyte number at diagnosis harbored a mixture of bcr-abl-negative and positive colonies and an increase in the percentage of bcr-abl-negative colonies was observed in all cases. CML patients with a high leukocyte count at diagnosis, however, showed only bcr-abl-positive progenitors even after hyperthermia. PBSCs showed a significant higher sensitivity at the LTCIC level but not at the CFU-GM level, after treatment at 42 degrees C, as compared to the control PBSC samples obtained from nonhematologic cancer patients. Molecular analysis of individual colonies demonstrated an increase of bcr-abl-negative progenitors after thermic treatment in two out of three samples. When comparing both stem cell sources, PBSCs showed a decreased thermic sensitivity as compared to the BM samples at the CFU-GM level, whereas at the LTCIC level an increased thermic sensitivity was observed, both for the controls and the CML samples. In conclusion, both for BM and PBSCs samples, CML progenitors are more sensitive to hyperthermia than control cells, especially at the LTCIC level. In agreement with these results, an increase of bcr-abl-negative progenitors in six out of seven samples could be demonstrated either at the CFU-GM level, LTCIC level or both. Hyperthermia should be explored further as a possible purging modality in CML. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study we compared interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (I-FISH) with reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for the molecular analysis of hematopoietic colonies derived from patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Molecular analysis of individual colonies is often performed to monitor purging efficacy in CML. We harvested individual colony-forming unit granulocyte-macrophage (CFU-GM) colonies. One half was analyzed with I-FISH, for the presence of bcr-abl fusion gene. The other half was analyzed with RT-PCR for the presence of the bcr-abl mRNA. We wanted to address the following questions: (1) is the bcr-abl gene always expressed in CFU-GM colonies and (2) which technique has to be preferred to analyze individual CFU-GM colonies? In total, 133 colonies, derived from six CML patients, could be analyzed both with I-FISH and RT-PCR. We found a positive correlation in 89% of the cases: 118 colonies showed the same results with both techniques. However, 15 of the 106 I-FISH-positive colonies were negative in the RT-PCR. Serial analysis of the cDNA derived from 22 colonies showed in each round of amplification 21-29% RT-PCR-negative but I-FISH-positive colonies. However, all I-FISH-positive colonies showed at least one positive RT-PCR, either in the first, second or third round of amplification. These results indicate that the bcr-abl gene is probably always transcriptionally active in CFU-GM colonies. Reliable analysis with RT-PCR is possible but likely to generate false negative results. We conclude that: (1) I-FISH offers a reliable alternative to RT-PCR for analyzing individual hematopoietic colonies and (2) results obtained with RT-PCR should only be interpreted with caution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Responds to questions put forth by Michele Baccarani on the data presented in the paper 'Hypersensitivity of bcr-abl-positive progenitors to hyperthermia in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia.' Explanation provided to various conclusions arrived at in the study.

Summary: Commercial cellular tests are used to diagnose Lyme borreliosis (LB), but studies on their clinical validation are lacking. This study evaluated the utility of an in‐house and a commercial enzyme‐linked immunosorbent spot (ELISpot) assay for the diagnosis of Lyme neuroborreliosis (LNB). Prospectively, peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were isolated from patients and controls and analysed using an in‐house Borrelia ELISpot assay and the commercial LymeSpot assay. B. burgdorferi B31 whole cell lysate and a mixture of outer surface proteins were used to stimulate the PBMCs and the numbers of interferon‐gamma‐secreting T cells were measured. Results were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Eighteen active and 12 treated LNB patients, 10 healthy individuals treated for an early (mostly cutaneous) manifestation of LB in the past and 47 untreated healthy individuals were included. Both assays showed a poor diagnostic performance with sensitivities, specificities, positive and negative predictive values ranging from 44.4–66.7%, 42.0–72.5%, 21.8–33.3% and 80.5–87.0%, respectively. The LymeSpot assay performed equally poorly when the calculation method of the manufacturer was used. Both the in‐house and the LymeSpot assay are unable to diagnose active LNB or to monitor antibiotic treatment success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: PCR on a nasopharyngeal sample is the reference method for the detection of SARS-nCoV-2. However, combined throat/nasal sampling as a testing method has several advantages. We compared the combined throat/nasal sampling with nasopharyngeal sampling for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers suspected of COVID-19. Methods: In 107 healthcare workers with symptoms of COVID-19, combined throat/nasal sampling and nasopharyngeal sampling was performed. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 was performed by RT-PCR targeting. Results: A total of 80 healthcare workers (74.8%) tested negative with both sampling methods, and 25 healthcare workers (23.4%) tested positive with both sampling methods. There were two discrepant results with positive PCR in combined throat/nasal swabs and negative PCR in nasopharyngeal swabs (1.9%). The κ index for concordance between the 2 sampling methods was high (0.95). The median cycle threshold (Ct) value of PCR on nasopharyngeal samples was significantly lower than the Ct value of PCR on combined throat/nasal samples (19 (IQR 17–20) versus 21 (IQR 18–29) cycles, p value 0.01). Conclusion: Combined throat/nasal swabs yield a similar sensitivity to detect SARS-CoV-2 as nasopharyngeal swabs and are a good alternative sampling method, despite a lower Ct value for the nasopharyngeal samples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clin Microbiol Infect 2012; 18: E466-E472 Abstract Dutch laboratories are currently changing their breakpoint criteria from mostly Clinical Laboratory and Standards Institute (CLSI) breakpoints to European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) breakpoints. To evaluate the impact of these changes, we studied antimicrobial resistance trends of Escherichia coli in blood specimens from January 2008 to January 2012 using CLSI and EUCAST breakpoints and compared them with the antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) interpretations reported by Dutch laboratories participating in the Infectious Disease Surveillance Information System for Antibiotic Resistance (ISIS-AR). ISIS-AR collects AST interpretations, including underlying minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of routinely cultured bacterial species on a monthly basis from Dutch laboratories. MICs of Etests or automated systems were reinterpreted according to the CLSI 2009 and EUCAST 2010 guidelines. Trends in non-susceptibility (i.e. intermediate resistant and resistant) over time were analysed by the Cochran-Armitage test for trend. The effects of the change from CLSI to EUCAST breakpoints on non-susceptibility were small. There were no differences in non-susceptibility to amoxicillin, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, cefuroxim, gentamicin and co-trimoxazol and only small differences (1-1.5%) for ciprofloxacin between AST interpretations by CLSI or EUCAST. However, for ceftazidime, and cefotaxime/ceftriaxone the proportion of non-susceptibility was substantially higher when EUCAST breakpoints were used (2-3%). The effects on time trends of the change in guidelines were limited, with only substantial differences for the oxymino-cephalosporins. Our study shows that the implementation of EUCAST breakpoints has a limited effect on the proportion of non-susceptible isolates and time trends in E. coli for most, but not all, antimicrobial agents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clin Microbiol Infect 2011; 17: 1704-1710 Abstract Multiple body site screening and pre-emptive isolation of patients at risk for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriage are considered essential for control of nosocomial spread. The relative importance of extranasal screening when using rapid diagnostic testing (RDT) is unknown. Using data from a multicentre study evaluating BD GeneOhm™ MRSA PCR (IDI), Xpert MRSA (GeneXpert) and chromogenic agar, added to conventional cultures, we determined cost-effectiveness assuming isolation measures would have been based on RDT results of different hypothetical screening regimes. Costs per isolation day avoided were calculated for regimes with single or less extensive multiple site RDT, regimes without conventional back-up cultures and when PCR would have been performed with pooling of swabs. Among 1764 patients at risk, MRSA prevalence was 3.3% ( n = 59). In all scenarios the negative predictive value is above 98.4%. With back-up cultures of all sites as a reference, the costs per isolation day avoided were €15.19, €30.83 and €45.37 with 'nares only' screening using chromogenic agar, IDI and GeneXpert, respectively, as compared with €19.95, €95.77 and €125.43 per isolation day avoided when all body sites had been screened. Without back-up cultures costs per isolation day avoided using chromogenic agar would range from €9.24 to €76.18 when costs per false-negative RDT range from €5000 up to €50 000; costs for molecular screening methods would be higher in all scenarios evaluated. In conclusion, in a low endemic setting chromogenic agar screening added to multiple site conventional cultures is the most cost-effective MRSA screening strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pre-emptive isolation of suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriers is considered essential for controlling the spread of MRSA, but noncolonized patients will be isolated unnecessarily as a result of a delay in diagnosis of 3-5 days with conventional cultures. We determined costs per isolation day avoided, and incremental costs of rapid MRSA screening tests when added to conventional screening, but with decisions on isolation measures based on PCR results. A prospective multicentre study evaluating BD GeneOhm MRSA PCR ('IDI') (BD Diagnostics, San Diego, CA, USA), Xpert MRSA ('GeneXpert') (Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) and chromogenic agar (MRSA-ID) (bioMérieux, Marcy-l'Etoile, France) was performed in 14 Dutch hospitals. Among 1764 patients at risk, MRSA prevalence was 3.3% (n = 59). Duration of isolation was 19.7 and 16.1 h with IDI and GeneXpert, respectively, and would have been 30.0 and 76.2 h when based on chromogenic agar and conventional cultures, respectively. Negative predictive values (at a patient level) were 99.5%, 99.1% and 99.5% for IDI, GeneXpert and chromogenic agar, respectively. Numbers of isolation days were reduced by 60% and 47% with PCR-based and chromogenic agar-based screening, respectively. The cost per test was ϵ56.22 for IDI, ϵ69.62 for GeneXpert and ϵ2.08 for chromogenic agar, and additional costs per extra isolation day were ϵ26.34. Costs per isolation day avoided were ϵ95.77 (IDI) and ϵ125.43 (GeneXpert). PCR-based decision-making added ϵ153.64 (IDI) and ϵ193.84 (GeneXpert) per patient to overall costs and chromogenic testing would have saved ϵ30.79 per patient. Rapid diagnostic testing safely reduces the number of unnecessary isolation days, but only chromogenic screening, and not PCR-based screening, can be considered as cost saving. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recipients of allogeneic stem cell transplants (SCT) often show active Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) infection, which may progress to EBV-associated lymphoproliferative disorders. It is not known whether these EBV infections are true reactivations of the endogenous EBV strain or re-infections with an exogenous EBV strain. Fifty-three recipients of matched related or matched unrelated donor grafts were studied. EBV monitoring was based on a realtime TaqMan™ EBV DNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay in plasma. In 17 patients, EBV DNA PCR monitoring was performed in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) as well. Mouth washings (MWs) were collected pre-transplant from all patients and family donors. Both pre-transplant EBV DNA from MWs and post-transplant EBV DNA from plasma or PBMCs were successfully obtained in 6 patients. A nested PCR targeting the EBV latent membrane protein-1 C-terminus gene was used to determine sequence variations enabling EBV strain typing. In 3 of 6 patients, the post-transplant EBV sequence pattern differed from the pre-transplant pattern, indicating a re-infection post-transplant with an exogenous strain instead of a reactivation of the original endogenous EBV strain. In the other 3 patients, the endogenous strain was identified. Active EBV infection resulting from re-infection was more severe compared with active EBV infection because of reactivation. In conclusion, active EBV infections after allogeneic SCT frequently result from re-infection with an exogenous EBV strain instead of a true reactivation of the endogenous strain and are potentially more severe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]