Search

Amyloidosis is a group of idiopathic clinical syndromes caused by the deposition of insoluble fibrillar proteins (amyloid) in the extracellular matrix of organs and tissues. These deposits disrupt the function of the target organ. Amyloidosis can manifest as a systemic disease or a single-organ involvement (local form). Its etiology still remains unclear. Deposits of amyloid in the larynx are rare, accounting for between 0.2 and 1.2% of benign tumors of the larynx. In this retrospective study, we report the clinical aspects, diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of five female patients with localized laryngeal amyloidosis without systemic involvement. The patients were all treated successfully using microlaryngoscopy with CO2 laser or cold instruments. Prognosis is excellent; however, appropriate follow-up is an important part of the long-term management of this disease in order to prevent and control the possibility of local recurrence.

Antibiotics are important for the treatment and prevention of invasive Haemophilus influenzae disease. Reduced susceptibility to clinically relevant drugs, except ampicillin, has been uncommon in the United States. Susceptibility of 700 invasive H. influenzae isolates, collected through population-based surveillance during 2016, was assessed for 15 antibiotics using broth microdilution, according to the CLSI guidelines; a subset of 104 isolates were also assessed for rifampin susceptibility using Etest. Genomes were sequenced to identify genes and mutations known to be associated with reduced susceptibility to clinically relevant drugs. A total of 508 (72.6%) had reduced susceptibility to at least one antibiotic and more than half of the isolates exhibited reduced susceptibility to only one (33.6%) or two (21.6%) antibiotic classes. All tested isolates were susceptible to rifampin, a chemoprophylaxis agent, and <1% ( n  = 3) of isolates had reduced susceptibility to third generation cephalosporins, which are recommended for invasive disease treatment. In contrast, ampicillin resistance was more common (28.1%) and predominantly associated with the detection of a β-lactamase gene; 26.2% of isolates in the collection contained either a TEM-1 or ROB-1 β-lactamase gene, including 88.8% of ampicillin-resistant isolates. β-lactamase negative ampicillin-resistant (BLNAR) isolates were less common and associated with ftsI mutations; resistance to amoxicillin-clavulanate was detected in <2% ( n  = 13) of isolates. The proportion of reduced susceptibility observed was higher among nontypeable H. influenzae and serotype e than other serotypes. US invasive H. influenzae isolates remain predominantly susceptible to clinically relevant antibiotics except ampicillin, and BLNAR isolates remain uncommon. IMPORTANCE Antibiotics play an important role for the treatment and prevention of invasive Haemophilus influenzae disease. Antimicrobial resistance survey of invasive H. influenzae isolates collected in 2016 showed that the US H. influenzae population remained susceptible to clinically relevant antibiotics, except for ampicillin. Detection of approximately a quarter ampicillin-resistant and β-lactamase containing strains demonstrates that resistance mechanisms can be acquired and sustained within the H. influenzae population, highlighting the continued importance of antimicrobial resistance surveillance for H. influenzae to monitor susceptibility trends and mechanisms of resistance.

Point-of-care antigen tests are an important tool for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Antigen tests are less sensitive than real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (rRT-PCR). Data on the performance of the BinaxNOW antigen test compared to rRT-PCR and viral culture by symptom and known exposure status, timing during disease, or exposure period and demographic variables are limited. During 3 to 17 November 2020, we collected paired upper respiratory swab specimens to test for SARS-CoV-2 by rRT-PCR and Abbott BinaxNOW antigen test at two community testing sites in Pima County, Arizona. We administered a questionnaire to capture symptoms, known exposure status, and previous SARS-CoV-2 test results. Specimens positive by either test were analyzed by viral culture. Previously we showed overall BinaxNOW sensitivity was 52.5%. Here, we showed BinaxNOW sensitivity increased to 65.7% among currently symptomatic individuals reporting a known exposure. BinaxNOW sensitivity was lower among participants with a known exposure and previously symptomatic (32.4%) or never symptomatic (47.1%) within 14 days of testing. Sensitivity was 71.1% in participants within a week of symptom onset. In participants with a known exposure, sensitivity was highest 8 to 10 days postexposure (75%). The positive predictive value for recovery of virus in cell culture was 56.7% for BinaxNOW-positive and 35.4% for rRT-PCR-positive specimens. Result reporting time was 2.5 h for BinaxNOW and 26 h for rRT-PCR. Point-of-care antigen tests have a shorter turnaround time than laboratory-based nucleic acid amplification tests, which allows for more rapid identification of infected individuals. Antigen test sensitivity limitations are important to consider when developing a testing program.

Serologic assays developed for SARS-CoV-2 detect different antibody subtypes and are based on different target antigens. Comparison of the performance of a SARS-CoV-2 Spike-Protein ELISA and the nucleocapsid-based Abbott ArchitectTM SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay indicated that the assays had high concordance, with rare paired discordant tests results., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

In a household study, loss of taste and/or smell was the fourth most reported symptom (26/42 [62%]) among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case patients and had the highest positive predictive value (83% [95% confidence interval [CI], 55%-95%) among household contacts. Olfactory and taste dysfunctions should be considered for COVID-19 case identification and testing prioritization., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2020.)

Rapid antigen tests, such as the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card (BinaxNOW), offer results more rapidly (approximately 15-30 minutes) and at a lower cost than do highly sensitive nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) (1). Rapid antigen tests have received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for use in symptomatic persons (2), but data are lacking on test performance in asymptomatic persons to inform expanded screening testing to rapidly identify and isolate infected persons (3). To evaluate the performance of the BinaxNOW rapid antigen test, it was used along with real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing to analyze 3,419 paired specimens collected from persons aged ≥10 years at two community testing sites in Pima County, Arizona, during November 3-17, 2020. Viral culture was performed on 274 of 303 residual real-time RT-PCR specimens with positive results by either test (29 were not available for culture). Compared with real-time RT-PCR testing, the BinaxNOW antigen test had a sensitivity of 64.2% for specimens from symptomatic persons and 35.8% for specimens from asymptomatic persons, with near 100% specificity in specimens from both groups. Virus was cultured from 96 of 274 (35.0%) specimens, including 85 (57.8%) of 147 with concordant antigen and real-time RT-PCR positive results, 11 (8.9%) of 124 with false-negative antigen test results, and none of three with false-positive antigen test results. Among specimens positive for viral culture, sensitivity was 92.6% for symptomatic and 78.6% for asymptomatic individuals. When the pretest probability for receiving positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 is elevated (e.g., in symptomatic persons or in persons with a known COVID-19 exposure), a negative antigen test result should be confirmed by NAAT (1). Despite a lower sensitivity to detect infection, rapid antigen tests can be an important tool for screening because of their quick turnaround time, lower costs and resource needs, high specificity, and high positive predictive value (PPV) in settings of high pretest probability. The faster turnaround time of the antigen test can help limit transmission by more rapidly identifying infectious persons for isolation, particularly when used as a component of serial testing strategies., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Effective laboratory-based surveillance and public health response to bacterial meningitis depends on timely characterization of bacterial meningitis pathogens. Traditionally, characterizing bacterial meningitis pathogens such as Neisseria meningitidis (Nm) and Haemophilus influenzae (Hi) required several biochemical and molecular tests. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) has enabled the development of pipelines capable of characterizing the given pathogen with equivalent results to many of the traditional tests. Here, we present the Bacterial Meningitis Genomic Analysis Platform (BMGAP): a secure, web-accessible informatics platform that facilitates automated analysis of WGS data in public health laboratories. BMGAP is a pipeline comprised of several components, including both widely used, open-source third-party software and customized analysis modules for the specific target pathogens. BMGAP performs de novo draft genome assembly and identifies the bacterial species by whole-genome comparisons against a curated reference collection of 17 focal species including Nm, Hi, and other closely related species. Genomes identified as Nm or Hi undergo multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) and capsule characterization. Further typing information is captured from Nm genomes, such as peptides for the vaccine antigens FHbp, NadA, and NhbA. Assembled genomes are retained in the BMGAP database, serving as a repository for genomic comparisons. BMGAP's species identification and capsule characterization modules were validated using PCR and slide agglutination from 446 bacterial invasive isolates (273 Nm from nine different serogroups, 150 Hi from seven different serotypes, and 23 from nine other species) collected from 2017 to 2019 through surveillance programs. Among the validation isolates, BMGAP correctly identified the species for all 440 isolates (100% sensitivity and specificity) and accurately characterized all Nm serogroups (99% sensitivity and 98% specificity) and Hi serotypes (100% sensitivity and specificity). BMGAP provides an automated, multi-species analysis pipeline that can be extended to include additional analysis modules as needed. This provides easy-to-interpret and validated Nm and Hi genome analysis capacity to public health laboratories and collaborators. As the BMGAP database accumulates more genomic data, it grows as a valuable resource for rapid comparative genomic analyses during outbreak investigations., Competing Interests: RK, HS, ER, and GD were employed by General Dynamics Information Technology. FH was employed by IHRC Inc. DM was employed by Weems Design Studio, Inc. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Buono, Kelly, Topaz, Retchless, Silva, Chen, Ramos, Doho, Khan, Okomo-Adhiambo, Hu, Marasini and Wang.)

Background: More laboratories are screening for syphilis with automated treponemal immunoassays. We compared direct costs and downstream consequences when a local public health laboratory switches from a traditional algorithm (nontreponemal screening) to a reverse algorithm (treponemal screening)., Methods: We created a decision analysis model based on laboratory and surveillance data to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a reverse syphilis-screening algorithm from the perspectives of the Los Angeles County Public Health Laboratory and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (laboratory + STD Program costs) in 2015 US dollars., Results: The estimated total costs for the Department (Public Health Laboratories) were $2,153,225 ($367,119) for the traditional algorithm and $2,197,478 ($239,855) for the reverse algorithm. Reverse algorithm screening was estimated to detect an additional 626 cases of syphilis, 9.7% more than the traditional algorithm. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the reverse algorithm from the Public Health Department's perspective was $39 per additional syphilis case detected. Cost of follow-up, screening test costs, positivity rates, and frequency of repeat infections most affected the cost-effectiveness of reverse algorithm. Costs were significantly higher for the reverse algorithm when the enzyme Immunoassay/chemiluminescence immunoassay screening test cost was the same as the published Centers for Medicaid Services treponemal test cost., Conclusions: Using the reverse algorithm would have been slightly more expensive for the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, but would have identified more syphilis cases and would have resulted in lower laboratory costs.

We compared the performance and ease of use for three high-throughput treponemal immunoassays: Phoenix Biotech Trep-Sure Total Antibody EIA, Siemens ADVIA® Centaur Syphilis Assay, and DiaSorin LIAISON® Treponema Assay. One thousand serum samples submitted for routine screening were used in this study. Each assay demonstrated comparable sensitivity, specificity, and percent agreement (98-100%) compared with Treponema pallidum particle agglutination (TP-PA). Thus, treponemal immunoassays are an acceptable alternative for syphilis screening or confirmatory testing. Batch sizes and technologist active time varied between each treponemal immunoassay; the chemiluminescence platforms offered significantly greater ability to batch (random access vs. fixed batch sizes) in less time. When we compared the results obtained using a reverse algorithm approach to those obtained using a traditional algorithm, we found that the reverse algorithm identified 38 additional seropositive individuals that were not detected using the traditional algorithm. Clinical evaluation was useful for resolving cases with discordant serology., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Drug-resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae poses a significant public health challenge. In recent years, gonococci resistant to first- and second-line antibiotics have spread worldwide and new strains have developed that are increasingly resistant to third-generation cephalosporins, which are currently our last line of available treatments. Given the timeline required to develop new drugs or an effective vaccine for N. gonorrhoeae, a top priority is to use the drugs that are available as effectively as possible. Currently, clinical management of gonorrhoea is based upon treatment guidelines informed by international gonococcal antimicrobial susceptibility surveillance programmes. This approach, although currently the most practical, is subject to a number of limitations since surveillance data inherently provide population-level information. As a result, basing treatment guidelines on these data can result in the prescription of more aggressive or broader treatment than is needed by individual patients and hence inadvertently contribute to the development and spread of resistance to important drugs. Clearly, methods are needed that provide patient-specific drug susceptibility information in a time frame that would allow clinicians to prescribe individualized treatment regimens for gonorrhoea. Fortunately, in recent years, there have been a number of advances in the development of rapid methods for characterizing both the genotype and the drug resistance phenotype of N. gonorrhoeae strains. Here, we review these advances and propose additional studies that would help facilitate a transition towards an individualized treatment approach for gonorrhoea., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)