Search

BACKGROUND: Previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination, independently and combined (hybrid immunity), result in partial protection from subsequent infection and strong protection from severe disease. Proportions of the US population who have been infected, vaccinated, or have hybrid immunity remain unclear, posing a challenge for assessing effective pandemic mitigation strategies. METHODS: In this serial cross-sectional study, nationwide blood donor specimens collected during January-December 2021 were tested for anti-spike and anti-nucleocapsid antibodies, and donor COVID-19 vaccination history of ≥1 dose was collected. Monthly seroprevalence induced from SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 vaccination, or both, were estimated. Estimates were weighted to account for demographic differences from the general population and were compared temporally and by demographic factors. RESULTS: Overall, 1 123 855 blood samples were assayed. From January to December 2021, the weighted percentage of donations with seropositivity changed as follows: seropositivity due to vaccination without previous infection, increase from 3.5% (95% confidence interval, 3.4%-3.7%) to 64.0%, (63.5%-64.5%); seropositivity due to previous infection without vaccination, decrease from 15.6% (15.2%-16.0%) to 11.7% (11.4%-12.0%); and seropositivity due to hybrid immunity, increase from 0.7% (0.6%-0.7%) to 18.9% (18.5%-19.3%). Combined seroprevalence from infection, vaccination, or both increased from 19.8% (19.3%-20.2%) to 94.5% (93.5%-94.0%). Infection- and vaccination-induced antibody responses varied significantly by age, race-ethnicity, and region, but not by sex. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate substantial increases in population humoral immunity from SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 vaccination, and hybrid immunity during 2021. These findings are important to consider in future COVID-19 studies and long-term pandemic mitigation efforts.

BackgroundA national serosurvey of U.S. blood donors conducted in partnership with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was initiated to estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infections and vaccinations.MethodsBeginning in July 2020, the Nationwide Blood Donor Seroprevalence Study collaborated with multiple blood collection organizations, testing labs, and leadership from government partners to capture, test, and analyze approximately 150,000 blood donation specimens per month in a repeated, cross-sectional seroprevalence survey.ResultsA CDC website (https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#nationwide-blood-donor-seroprevalence) provided stratified, population-level results to public health professionals and the general public.DiscussionThe study adapted operations as the pandemic evolved, changing specimen flow and testing algorithms, and collecting additional data elements in response to changing policies on universal blood donation screening and administration of SARS-CoV-2 spike-based vaccines. The national serosurvey demonstrated the utility of serosurveillance testing of residual blood donations and highlighted the role of the blood collection industry in public-private partnerships during a public health emergency.

Background: Hepatitis B core antibody (anti‐HBc) screening has been implemented in many blood establishments to help prevent transmission of hepatitis B virus (HBV), including from donors with occult HBV infection (OBI). We review HBV screening algorithms across blood establishments globally and their potential effectiveness in reducing transmission risk. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire on HBV screening and follow‐up strategies was distributed to members of the International Society of Blood Transfusion working party on transfusion‐transmitted infectious diseases. Screening data from 2022 were assimilated and analyzed. Results: A total of 30 unique responses were received from 25 countries. Sixteen respondents screened all donations for anti‐HBc, with 14 also screening all donations for HBV DNA. Anti‐HBc prevalence was 0.42% in all blood donors and 1.19% in new donors in low‐endemic countries; however, only 44% of respondents performed additional anti‐HBc testing to exclude false reactivity. 0.68% of anti‐HBc positive, HBsAg‐negative donors had detectable HBV DNA. Ten respondents did universal HBV DNA screening without anti‐HBc, whereas four respondents did not screen for either. Deferral strategies for anti‐HBc positive donors were highly variable. One transfusion‐transmission from an anti‐HBc negative donor was reported. Discussion: Anti‐HBc screening identifies donors with OBI but also results in the unnecessary deferral of a significant number of donors with resolved HBV infection and donors with false‐reactive anti‐HBc results. Whilst confirmation of anti‐HBc results could be improved to reduce donor deferral, transmission risks associated with anti‐HBc negative OBI donors must be considered. In high‐endemic areas, highly sensitive HBV DNA testing is required to identify infectious donors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives Materials and Methods Results Conclusion The World Health Organization (WHO) African Region accounts for 94% of malaria cases globally, with variability recognized within endemic regions. To determine the detection rate of Plasmodium RNA in blood donors resident in malaria‐endemic areas, samples from three African countries were tested using a Plasmodium nucleic acid test.Whole blood (WB) samples collected from routine donors in Cameroon, Madagascar and Mali were shipped frozen to the United States. Samples were tested individually from WB lysates with the Procleix Plasmodium assay (transcription‐mediated amplification [TMA]). Reactive samples were considered either repeat reactive or initial reactive only, depending on TMA‐retest results. When available, matching plasma samples were tested for Plasmodium antibodies by enzyme immunoassay (EIA).Plasmodium repeat reactivity ranged from 41% (91/223 tested) in Cameroon to 12% (26/216) in Mali and 1% (3/249) in Madagascar. Initially reactive samples, where reactivity did not repeat, were identified from Cameroon (5/223; 2%) and Mali (2/216; 1%). The matched‐plasma subgroup had EIA reactivity ranging from 86% (113/131 tested) in Cameroon to 59% (10/17) in Mali and 27% (68/248) in Madagascar.Plasmodium ribosomal RNA (rRNA) detection and antibody rates varied greatly in the three countries studied. Detection of Plasmodium rRNA can provide an additional tool to address malaria risk in blood donors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case in the United States was recognized on 19 January 2020, but the time of introduction of the virus into the United States is unknown. An existing sample cohort was examined for serologic evidence of early severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. Methods A repository of 46 120 samples from healthy routine blood donors, representing 46 states and the District of Columbia, was tested for total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (anti-N) using a commercial test. All reactive samples were further tested using an experimental receptor-binding domain (RBD)–specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Further testing was also conducted for anti-spike (anti-S) antibodies by commercial tests, experimental anti-S immunologic blocking, and for antibodies to the 4 human cold coronaviruses. Results Anti-N reactivity was observed in 92 tested samples (0.2%), 91 of which had adequate volume for further testing; of these, 55 were confirmed positive by anti-RBD. None of these reactive findings were attributable to the other human coronaviruses tested. The confirmed-positive frequency increased over time paralleling patterns observed for COVID-19 cases reported in the United States (in contrast to stable patterns over time for the cold coronaviruses). Nine confirmed positive samples (0.07%) were identified among the 13 364 donations collected between 13 December 2019 and 22 January 2020. None of these early confirmed-positive samples were reactive by commercial anti-S tests suggesting very recent infection. Conclusions The samples tested in this study were broadly representative of the United States, and all were from individuals who had successfully donated blood. The antibody-reactive results of this study suggest that SARS-CoV-2 was likely present in the United States before 19 January 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Malaria is caused by protozoa of the genus Plasmodium and transmitted by Anopheles mosquitos. In the US, blood donors are assessed for malaria risk, including donor travel or previous residence in endemic areas and history of malaria by questionnaire and deferred for three months or three years, respectively. Methods: The Procleix Plasmodium Assay is a qualitative nucleic acid test based on transcription‐mediated amplification (TMA) for the detection of 18S ribosomal RNA of P. falciparum, P. ovale, P. vivax, P. malariae, and P. knowlesi for use on the Procleix Panther system. Analytical sensitivity was evaluated with in vitro transcripts and infected red blood cells. For clinical specificity, 12,800 individual donations and 283 pools of 16 samples from routine US donors were screened. Malaria risk was evaluated by testing 862 donors deferred for 3 years. Reactive results were confirmed with in‐house real‐time TMA assay and serology. Results: Assay sensitivity was 8.47–11.89 RNA copies/mL and 2.10–6.82 infected red cells/mL. Specificity was 99.99% in 12,800 individual donations and 100% in 283 pools of 16. Of 862 tested deferred donor samples, one donor (0.12%) confirmed positive individually and in pools; he remained confirmed positive for 13 months. The infected donor was a prior resident of a malaria‐endemic area in West Africa. Conclusions: The Procleix Plasmodium Assay showed high sensitivity and specificity and detected Plasmodium RNA in an asymptomatic presenting donor. This assay may prove helpful as a screening test versus the use of risk questions to reduce the number of donors deferred for malaria risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2019, the Food and Drug Administration revised the requirement for further testing of anti‐HCV‐reactive donations testing nucleic acid (NAT)‐nonreactive via routine mini‐pool (MP)‐NAT. Individual donation (ID)‐HCV NAT was required as a supplemental test prior to a second FDA‐licensed anti‐HCV assay; if ID‐HCV‐NAT is reactive, no further testing is required. This study investigated the rate of low‐level RNA in anti‐HCV‐reactive donation samples prior to and following the implementation of supplemental ID‐HCV NAT. Study Design/Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on frozen plasma unit samples from 1161 anti‐HCV confirmed‐positive/HCV‐NAT‐nonreactive donations collected from December 2014 to January 2020. Samples were tested by multiple replicates on the Grifols Procleix Ultrio Elite (UE) assay and corresponding discriminatory HCV (dHCV) assay on the Procleix Panther System. Prospectively, the prevalence of low‐level RNA in 2912 anti‐HCV‐reactive donations detected through routine screening from April 2020 through March 2021 was determined. Results: In retrospective analyses, 10 (0.86%) of 1161 plasma samples were UE reactive, of which four (0.34%) were dHCV reactive (in all replicates of UE and dHCV). Of 2912 anti‐HCV‐reactive donation samples testing NAT‐nonreactive via routine MP‐NAT, three (0.1%; 95% CI: 0.04‐0.30) were dHCV reactive; 37% of the remaining samples were reactive by a second anti‐HCV assay and thus serologically confirmed. Conclusions: Retrospective and prospective analysis in comparison to earlier studies revealed that low‐level HCV‐RNA reactivity is decreasing over time. The very low HCV‐RNA rates may be due to the widespread use of highly effective, direct‐acting anti‐viral treatments for those diagnosed with HCV infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA prevalence in blood donors from large geographic areas of high community transmission is limited. We tested residual donor plasma minipools (MPs) to determine SARS‐CoV‐2 RNAemia prevalence in six United States areas. Study Design/Methods: Blood donations collected from 7 March 2020 to 25 September 2020 were tested for SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA (vRNA) in MP of 6 or 16 donations using the Grifols Procleix SARS‐CoV‐2 research‐use only (RUO) transcription‐mediated amplification (TMA) assay. Reactive results were confirmed using an alternate target region TMA assay. Reactive MPs were tested by TMA after serial dilution to estimate viral load. Testing for anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 antibodies and infectivity was performed. Results: A total of 17,995 MPs corresponding to approximately 258,000 donations were tested for vRNA. Three confirmed reactive MP16 were identified. The estimated prevalence of vRNA reactive donations was 1.16/100,000 (95% CI 0.40, 3.42). The vRNA‐reactive samples were non‐reactive for antibody, and the estimated viral loads of the (presumed single) positive donations within each MP ranged from <1000 to <4000 copies/ml. When tested, no infectivity was observed in inoculated permissive cell cultures. Discussion: Blood donation MP‐nucleic acid testing (NAT) indicated that SARS‐CoV‐2 RNAemia is infrequent and, when detected, the vRNA was at low concentrations. Only one RNA‐reactive MP could be tested for infectivity for operational reasons and was not infectious in cell culture. These findings support current recommendations from international and national regulatory agencies to not screen donors by NAT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A kidney transplant patient without known tick exposure developed encephalitis 3 weeks after transplantation. During the transplant hospitalization, the patient had received a blood transfusion from an asymptomatic donor later discovered to have been infected with Powassan virus. Here, we describe a probable instance of transfusion-transmitted Powassan virus infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite West Nile virus (WNV) blood donation screening using nucleic acid testing (NAT), donors with low viral loads not detected by mini-pool-NAT have led to transfusion transmitted (TT)-WNV infection. We describe a probable case of fatal TT-WNV infection from an individual donor (ID)-NAT non-reactive apheresis platelet donation.Study Design and Methods: An apheresis platelet donation was WNV ID-NAT reactive and prior donations from the same donor were investigated. A WNV ID-NAT non-reactive apheresis platelet unit collected 26 days earlier was transfused during heart transplantation to a patient who subsequently developed WNV neuroinvasive disease and expired. The source of the recipient's WNV infection was investigated.Results: Twenty-six days after collection of the suspect platelet unit, a donation from the same donor was WNV ID-NAT reactive and WNV IgM and IgG positive. In addition to the suspect platelet unit, the heart transplant recipient who developed WNV infection received 17 blood components from 24 donors. Serologic testing performed on 11 of the remaining 24 donors (46%) was WNV IgM negative. Pre-transplant recipient and heart donor samples tested WNV RNA and IgM negative.Conclusion: A probable case of fatal neuroinvasive TT-WNV was linked to an infectious apheresis platelet unit undetected by WNV ID-NAT. It is hypothesized that the suspect unit was collected early in the viremic period when viral RNA was below the limit-of-detection of the ID-NAT assay. Implementation of ID-NAT screening of blood donors has not entirely eliminated the risk of TT-WNV infections, which may best be addressed by pathogen inactivation technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rare transfusion-transmitted West Nile virus (WNV) cases usually occur due to gaps in testing involving converting to more sensitive nucleic acid testing (NAT) formats (referred to as triggering). Using data from 2014 to 2018, we investigated a strategy used to increase detection early in the triggering period and reviewed its yield as the individual donation (ID)-NAT geographic area was decreased.Methods: Mini-pool-NAT transitioned to ID-NAT following triggering based on one WNV NAT-reactive donation (having an elevated signal, repeat reactive, or in an area with WNV ongoing activity). ID-NAT-triggered geographic areas included an entire state (2014-2017) or collections within a 50-mile radius of the triggering donor's residential zip code (2018). During the MP- to ID-NAT transition, donation samples were retrieved and tested by ID-NAT for those with results not yet released (referred to as in-process testing). Reactive sample confirmation was performed by repeat NAT of an independent sample or antibody testing.Results: ID-NAT included 3.2 million donations of more than 25 million tested year-round, resulting in 684 confirmed positives; all confirmed-positive donations occurred from June to December (0.64/10,000). Overall, 52% (358/684) required ID-NAT for detection, including 68 (19%) antibody negatives. Ten of 19 (53%) identified in-process were ID-NAT-only detectable, including four antibody negatives, or approximately 1 per year (2.8% of ID-NAT-only detectable). With reduced triggering geography, 12 of 19 (63%) were not identified (including 6/10 ID-NAT-only detectable, and 2/4 ID-NAT-only detectable/antibody negative).Conclusion: WNV NAT's utility is between June-December; however, abandoning testing outside of this time may increase risk. While in-process testing identified approximately one ID-NAT-only detectable (antibody-negative) donation per year, reducing the geographic triggered area decreased its effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: US blood donors are tested for Trypanosoma cruzi antibodies only at their first presentation, based on studies, reviewed here, demonstrating the absence of incident infections. Reports of autochthonous human transmissions of the parasite in Texas have raised concern about the safety of one-time testing.Methods: Positive donation frequencies were evaluated among first-time blood donations from 2007 to 2015. Rates and their temporal changes were evaluated in an area of high T. cruzi infection and compared with rates elsewhere. Donors with positive results were surveyed for risk factors and relevant demographic characteristics.Results: Data from 9.1 million first-time donations were analyzed; 585 (1:15,544) were confirmed positive by radioimmunoprecipitation assay (RIPA) or concordantly positive with a second screening test/licensed assay. Seroprevalence in first-time donors in Southern California (an area of high endemicity) was 1:2,747, or 5.7-fold higher than the overall rate. Rates did not change over time nationally but showed a nonsignificant consistent downward trend in Southern California. The majority (92%) of donors who responded to a questionnaire had one or more T. cruzi endemic-area risk factors. Five donors with likely autochthonous infection were identified (2007-2013); nine additional donors had RIPA false positivity.Conclusion: T. cruzi seroprevalence among donors nationally and in an area of high enzootic infection were stable or declining. Almost all interviewed seropositive donors had known risk factors indicating likely infection years earlier while residing in T. cruzi-endemic areas. In the United States, there was no evidence of increased T. cruzi prevalence among first-time donors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Characteristics of US blood donors with recent (RBI) or occult (OBI) hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection are not well defined.Methods: Donors with RBI and OBI were identified by nucleic acid and serologic testing among 34.4 million donations during 2009-2015. Consenting donors were interviewed and their HBV S-gene sequenced.Results: The overall rate of HBV-infected donors was 7.95 per 100,000; of these, 0.35 per 100,000 and 1.70 per 100,000 were RBI and OBI, respectively. RBI (n = 120) and OBI (n = 583) donors constituted 26% of all HBV-infected (n = 2735) donors. Detection of HBV DNA in 92% of OBI donors required individual donation nucleic acid testing. Donors with OBI compared to RBI were older (mean age, 48 vs 39 years; p < 0.0001) with lower median viral loads (9 vs. 529 IU/mL; p < 0.0001). A higher proportion of OBI than RBI donors were born or resided in an endemic country (39% vs. 5%; p = 0.0078). Seventy-seven percent of all RBI and OBI donors had multiple sex partners, an HBV-risk factor. Of 40 RBI and 10 OBI donors whose S gene was sequenced, 33 (83%) and 6 (60%), respectively, carried HBV subgenotype A2; 18 (55%) and 2 (33%), respectively, shared an identical sequence. Infection with 1 or more putative HBV-immune-escape mutants was identified in 5 (50%) of OBI but no RBI donors.Conclusion: RBI and OBI continue to be identified at low rates, confirming the importance of comprehensive HBV DNA screening of US blood donations. HBV-infected donors require referral for care and evaluation and contact tracing; their HBV strains may provide important information on emergent genotypes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The document provides a comprehensive overview of donor- and recipient-triggered lookback procedures for traditional transfusion-transmitted infections in various countries, including Singapore, Japan, the United States, France, and Australia. It emphasizes the importance of testing protocols, individual assessments, and adherence to regulatory requirements in managing the process. Feedback from stakeholders and the low incidence of confirmed infections through lookback investigations are also discussed, highlighting ongoing efforts to improve and streamline procedures. The document includes data on testing procedures, demographics, and specific protocols for HBV, HCV, HIV, syphilis, and HTLV, showcasing the diverse approaches taken by different countries in managing transfusion-transmitted infections. [Extracted from the article]

The article delves into the history and current practices of donor- and recipient-triggered lookback for traditional transfusion-transmitted infections (TTIs) like HIV, HBV, HCV, HTLV, and syphilis. It stresses the importance of refining uniform criteria based on risk-based decision-making and notes the diminishing effectiveness of lookback programs due to advancements in testing and donor selection. The study underscores the necessity for policy adjustments and consensus on factors to consider before proceeding with lookback procedures, while also offering insights into the yield of such programs and the importance of periodically evaluating resources and ethical concerns. Additionally, it explores studies and analyses on hepatitis B virus reactivation, transmission, and screening in patients with hematological malignancies and immunocompromised hosts, as well as the transmission of hepatitis C virus through blood components in Germany despite mandatory screening. The document further includes information on healthcare-associated hepatitis B and C outbreaks reported to the CDC from 2008 to 2019, along with instances of rare transmission of hepatitis B virus by donors with occult infection in the Netherlands, concluding with a method for tracing back transfusion-related infections. [Extracted from the article]