Search

Background There are conflicting reports on the performance of rapid antigen detection tests (RDT) in the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant; however, these tests continue to be used frequently to detect potentially contagious individuals with high viral loads. Aim The aim of this study was to investigate comparative detection of the Delta (B.1.617.2) and Omicron variants by using a selection of 20 RDT and a limited panel of pooled combined oro- and nasopharyngeal clinical Delta and Omicron specimens. Methods We tested 20 CE-marked RDT for their performance to detect SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron by using a panel of pooled clinical specimens collected in January 2022 in Berlin, Germany. Results We observed equivalent detection performance for Delta and Omicron for most RDT, and sensitivity was widely in line with our previous pre-Delta/Omicron evaluation. Some variation for individual RDT was observed either for Delta vs Omicron detection, or when compared with the previous evaluation, which may be explained both by different panel sizes resulting in different data robustness and potential limitation of batch-to-batch consistency. Additional experiments with three RDT using non-pooled routine clinical samples confirmed comparable performance to detect Delta vs Omicron. Overall, RDT that were previously positively evaluated retained good performance also for Delta and Omicron variants. Conclusion Our findings suggest that currently available RDT are sufficient for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron variants.

The online workshop on IVD regulation was performed to broaden the understanding of the technical documentation needed for IVD licensing and the strategies to asses it.Testing of blood donors and donations significantly reduces the risk of transmitting transfusion-transmissible infections. Many test systems are commercially available, but not all meet the recommended sensitivity and specificity standards. Many African countries either lack functional structures for the regulation of IVDs this poses a threat to the quality of the blood supply.The Paul-Ehrlich-Institut BloodTrain organised an online workshop in September 2021 to introduce staff from several National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs) in Africa to the regulation of IVD and the technical information that need to be provided by the manufacturers of blood screening IVD. Their evaluation was trained in practical exercises.This online workshop brought together over hundred participants from NRAs of 12 African countries. Speakers from PEI, Blood Train, WHO and academia, with experience in IVD regulation trained participants in the various topics addressed during this workshop.This workshop presented a great starting point for most participating NRAs to set up and/or strengthen their regulatory structures for IVDs.

In recent years, several modified recombinant factor (F) VIII and FIX therapeutics with extended half-life have been licensed internationally for the treatment of haemophilia. Safe and effective use of these products requires monitoring of factor activity in patient plasma. The potency of all FVIII and FIX products is currently assigned in International Units (IU) which anchors the relationship between potency labelling, dosing and clinical monitoring. However, varying degrees of discrepancies in factor activity assays are observed between and within the factor activity analytical methods (one-stage clotting and chromogenic), when measuring these modified products against plasma and plasma-derived (concentrate) International Standards (IS) or in-house reference standard traceable to the IS. Availability of product-specific reference reagents would mitigate assay discrepancies, facilitate independent testing of assay methods and reagents, and ensure long-term continuity of the IU related to each product. A hearing meeting was organised by the WHO to discuss the requirements for product-specific reference materials for these products and whether these reference materials should be produced by the WHO. Advantages and disadvantages of product-specific reference materials were identified and discussed.

Introduction The detection of SARS-CoV-2 with rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) has become an important tool to identify infected people and break infection chains. These RDT are usually based on antigen detection in a lateral flow approach. Aim We aimed to establish a comprehensive specimen panel for the decentralised technical evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic tests. Methods While for PCR diagnostics the validation of a PCR assay is well established, there is no common validation strategy for antigen tests, including RDT. In this proof-of-principle study we present the establishment of a panel of 50 pooled clinical specimens that cover a SARS-CoV-2 concentration range from 1.1 × 109 to 420 genome copies per mL of specimen. The panel was used to evaluate 31 RDT in up to six laboratories. Results Our results show that there is considerable variation in the detection limits and the clinical sensitivity of different RDT. We show that the best RDT can be applied to reliably identify infectious individuals who present with SARS-CoV-2 loads down to 106 genome copies per mL of specimen. For the identification of infected individuals with SARS-CoV-2 loads corresponding to less than 106 genome copies per mL, only three RDT showed a clinical sensitivity of more than 60%. Conclusions Sensitive RDT can be applied to identify infectious individuals with high viral loads but not to identify all infected individuals.

Introduction Numerous CE-marked SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag RDT) are offered in Europe, several of them with unconfirmed quality claims. Aim We performed an independent head-to-head evaluation of the sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Ag RDT offered in Germany. Methods We addressed the sensitivity of 122 Ag RDT in direct comparison using a common evaluation panel comprised of 50 specimens. Minimum sensitivity of 75% for panel specimens with a PCR quantification cycle (Cq) ≤ 25 was used to identify Ag RDT eligible for reimbursement in the German healthcare system. Results The sensitivity of different SARS-CoV-2 Ag RDT varied over a wide range. The sensitivity limit of 75% for panel members with Cq ≤ 25 was met by 96 of the 122 tests evaluated; 26 tests exhibited lower sensitivity, few of which failed completely. Some RDT exhibited high sensitivity, e.g. 97.5 % for Cq Conclusions This comparative evaluation succeeded in distinguishing less sensitive from better performing Ag RDT. Most of the evaluated Ag RDT appeared to be suitable for fast identification of acute infections associated with high viral loads. Market access of SARS-CoV-2 Ag RDT should be based on minimal requirements for sensitivity and specificity.

Background RNA viruses are associated with a high frequency of mutations because of the missing proofreading function of polymerases, such as reverse transcriptase. Between 2007 and 2010, six blood donations with false-negative nucleic acid technology (NAT) results were reported in Germany. Therefore, NAT screening in two viral genome regions was introduced by our blood donation service in 2010 on a voluntary basis and became mandatory in Germany since the beginning of 2015. Study design and methods Blood donor screening was done using, in parallel, the German Red Cross (GRC) HIV-1 CE long terminate repeats (LTR) PCR kit and the GRC HIV-1 gag CE PCR kit. In total, 7 million blood donations were screened during the study period from 2010 to 2014 with the GRC dual-target human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) NAT system. Additionally, three suspicious specimens were analyzed by four monotargeted NAT assays and by five dual-target NAT assays. Results Three of 7 million donations tested negative using the 5'LTR-polymerase chain reaction, but they were positive if amplification was performed in the gag region. HIV antibodies were detected in all three donations. Nucleic acid sequence analysis identified a deletion of 22 bases within the 5'LTR probe binding region. Three different ltr-based monotargeted assays missed two donations, except for a low-reactive result obtained by one of the assays. In total, the detection rates for HIV-1-positive donations were 37.5% (3/8) for monotargeted assays and 100% (10/10) for dual-target assays. Conclusion The current data demonstrate that dual-target NAT systems reduce the risk of false-negative HIV-1 NAT screening results.

Summary The WHO international standard for anti-rubella was first established in the 1960s when clinical diagnostics were in their infancy. Since the endorsement of the first international standard for anti-rubella IgG (RUBI-1-94), new rubella vaccines have been developed and global coverage of rubella vaccination has increased. Methods used to measure concentrations of anti-rubella IgG have also evolved to rapid, high-throughput binding assays, which have replaced often cumbersome and highly technical functional assays. During this timeframe, the protective concentration of antibody was set at 10 IU/mL by extrapolation of functional assay correlates; however, the subpopulation of antibodies within a polyclonal serum that confer protection remained undefined. Anti-rubella assays have variable formats, including antigens used, such that the same clinical sample tested on different assays can report different values with potentially devastating consequences, such as recommending to terminate pregnancy. WHO convened a meeting of experts in the rubella field to discuss the use of RUBI-1-94 and the potential future role of this international standard. The main conclusions of this meeting questioned the appropriateness of 10 IU/mL as the cutoff for protection and acknowledged the continuing role of RUBI-1-94 as a reference preparation to address analytical sensitivity and assay variation.

BACKGROUND It is now recognized that blood donors may be silently infected with hepatitis E virus (HEV) and that plasma pools used in the manufacture of plasma-derived medicinal products may also contain detectable virus RNA. The occurrence of HEV-infected blood and plasma donors can vary considerably depending on local epidemiology. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS Manufacturing plasma pools from North America, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia were examined for the presence of HEV using transcription-mediated amplification of HEV RNA; confirmatory testing was performed using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and sequencing. RESULTS A total of 484 pools were tested. Asian pools were most frequently positive for HEV RNA and had higher viral loads, although none exceeding 300 IU/mL, and the sequenced strains (n = 5) clustered with Genotype 4, including one significantly divergent sequence. Only HEV Genotype 3 was identified in North American (n = 5) and European (n = 5) pools. There was no evidence of HEV in any pools tested from the Middle East. CONCLUSIONS HEV was detected in manufacturing plasma pools from three different continents; viral loads were low—consistent with large pool sizes and moderate levels of HEV viremia at the individual donation level—but are nevertheless informative for risk assessment of plasma-derived medicinal products. Where sequencing was possible, analysis confirmed the presence of viruses consistent with locally circulating genotypes in the respective regions. The absence of HEV in Middle Eastern pools is consistent with the low prevalence of HEV in this region, likely due to low pork consumption.

BACKGROUND The identification of viruses in human blood is required for epidemiologic surveillance and to detect potentially emerging threats to blood transfusion safety. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS Viral nucleic acids in plasma fractionation pools assembled from blood donors in the United States and Europe were analyzed by viral metagenomics. RESULTS Anelloviruses were detected in each of the 10 plasma pools. Human pegivirus A (HPgV; GB virus type C) sequences were identified in eight of the 10 pools, more than 90% of which belong to Genotype 2. The recently described human HPgV2 in Flaviviridae was not detected. A small number of sequence reads of human papillomavirus were also detected in three pools. In one pool, two different gemycircularvirus genomes were identified and fully sequenced. The capsid protein of one gemycircularvirus shared 83% to 84% identity to those of genomes from human serum and sewage. The presence of the gemycircularvirus genomes in the plasma pool was independently confirmed and the viral concentration estimated by digital PCR at more than 106 copies/mL assuming their origin from single donors. CONCLUSION Further research is required to elucidate whether gemycircularviruses can infect humans or are indicative of contamination occurring during phlebotomy, plasma pool processing, or ongoing donor fungal infections.

RNA viruses are associated with a high frequency of mutations because of the missing proofreading function of polymerases, such as reverse transcriptase. Between 2007 and 2010, six blood donations with false-negative nucleic acid technology (NAT) results were reported in Germany. Therefore, NAT screening in two viral genome regions was introduced by our blood donation service in 2010 on a voluntary basis and became mandatory in Germany since the beginning of 2015.Blood donor screening was done using, in parallel, the German Red Cross (GRC) HIV-1 CE long terminate repeats (LTR) PCR kit and the GRC HIV-1 gag CE PCR kit. In total, 7 million blood donations were screened during the study period from 2010 to 2014 with the GRC dual-target human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) NAT system. Additionally, three suspicious specimens were analyzed by four monotargeted NAT assays and by five dual-target NAT assays.Three of 7 million donations tested negative using the 5'LTR-polymerase chain reaction, but they were positive if amplification was performed in the gag region. HIV antibodies were detected in all three donations. Nucleic acid sequence analysis identified a deletion of 22 bases within the 5'LTR probe binding region. Three different ltr-based monotargeted assays missed two donations, except for a low-reactive result obtained by one of the assays. In total, the detection rates for HIV-1-positive donations were 37.5% (3/8) for monotargeted assays and 100% (10/10) for dual-target assays.The current data demonstrate that dual-target NAT systems reduce the risk of false-negative HIV-1 NAT screening results.

BACKGROUND Hepatitis C virus (HCV) antigen and antibody combination assays have been launched as a cost-effective alternative to nucleic acid testing (NAT) for reducing the antibody-negative window period (WP). Later, a HCV antigen chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) became available. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS A panel composed of 337 HCV NAT–yield samples that were characterized for viral load (VL) and genotype was used to compare the sensitivity of two combination enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (Monolisa, Bio-Rad; and Murex, formerly Abbott) and a HCV antigen CLIA (Abbott). Analytic sensitivity was compared with HCV RNA detection using Ultrio (Grifols) by testing serial dilutions of 10 genotype (gt)1 to gt4 samples. RESULTS HCV antigen CLIA detected 92.4% of samples, whereas Monolisa and Murex detected 38.3 and 47.5%, respectively. In the HCV RNA VL range of 105 to 107 IU/mL, Monolisa and Murex detected 38% to 56% of gt1, 85% to 78% of gt2, and 21% to 37% of gt3. The overall geometric mean 50% limit of detection (range) of Ultrio on gt1 to gt4 dilution series was 3.5 (1.2-7.7) copies/mL, compared to 3.3 × 106 (4.4 × 105-2.7 × 107), 3.4 × 106 (2.2 × 105-4.2 × 107), and 2728 (415-7243) copies/mL for Monolisa, Murex, and HCV antigen CLIA, respectively. CONCLUSION Analytical sensitivity of NAT was on average 1 million- and 780-fold higher than combination assays and HCV antigen CLIA, respectively. Relative sensitivities of combination assays differed for genotypes with Murex being more sensitive for gt1 and gt3 and Monolisa more sensitive for gt2. Although being less sensitive than NAT, combination assays could be considered in resource-limited settings since they detect 38% to 47% of seronegative WP donations.

Assays based on nucleic acid amplification technology (NAT) are increasingly used for screening of blood and for diagnosis or monitoring of patients. Both regulatory requirements for blood screening and international recommendations for the treatment of patients are based on common reference materials available globally for the standardization of NAT assays. World Health Organization International Standards (WHO ISs) and International Reference Panels (WHO IRPs) are primary reference materials. The characterization and manufacture of WHO reference materials as well as their evaluation is performed on behalf of the WHO by collaborating centers; their establishment is decided upon by the WHO Expert Committee on Biological Standardization (ECBS). The potency of the first WHO IS is defined by the ‘international unit' (IU) which should be maintained upon replacement of the IS. The IU, unlike copy number or genome equivalent, is defined by the IS with a physical existence, is available worldwide, and allows traceability and comparability of results. The anticipated use of WHO ISs is the calibration of secondary standards or the validation of essential assay features, e.g. limit of detection.

Background Nucleic acid amplification techniques (NAT) in routine blood donor screening considerably reduce the diagnostic window phase period. Nevertheless, several reports of false-negative NAT results were published. Here, four cases of human immunodeficiency virus Type 1 (HIV-1) RNA–positive blood donations that escaped detection by NAT screening are described. Study Design and Methods A total of 2.7 million blood donations were screened for viral infections between January 2010 and October 2012 in our German Red Cross blood donation service. Four plasma specimens with false-negative NAT results were comparatively investigated with 12 CE-marked NAT assays. In two cases of putative HIV-1 variants the target region of the NAT assay was sequenced allowing comparison with the respective primers and probes. Results Most of the NAT assays used in routine blood donor screening with the 5′-long terminal repeat (LTR) as target region demonstrated deficiencies in detecting the viral variants and the low-viral-carrier donations. Sequence analysis revealed in one case a deletion of 56 nucleotides within the 5′-LTR preventing the binding of the probe accompanied by a neighbored insertion of another 52 nucleotides and several primer mismatches in another case. No false-negative results were obtained for these cases using dual-target assays. The viral load of the remaining two false-negative results was below the NAT's limit of detection. Conclusion HIV-1 is characterized by a high mutation rate and rapid generation of new viral variants. By the use of one target region for HIV-1 NAT assays there is a certain risk of false-negative results. Employing HIV-1 multi- and dual-target assays in routine blood donor screening seems to be a reasonable possibility to minimize this problem.

Nucleic acid amplification technique–based assays are a primary method for the detection of acute hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection, but assay sensitivity can vary widely. To improve interlaboratory results for the detection and quantification of HEV RNA, a candidate World Health Organization (WHO) International Standard (IS) strain was evaluated in a collaborative study involving 23 laboratories from 10 countries. The IS, code number 6329/10, was formulated by using a genotype 3a HEV strain from a blood donation, diluted in pooled human plasma and lyophilized. A Japanese national standard, representing a genotype 3b HEV strain, was prepared and evaluated in parallel. The potencies of the standards were determined by qualitative and quantitative assays. Assay variability was substantially reduced when HEV RNA concentrations were expressed relative to the IS. Thus, WHO has established 6329/10 as the IS for HEV RNA, with a unitage of 250,000 International Units per milliliter.

For human hepatitis B virus eight distinct and two candidate genotypes are described. These genotypes differ with respect to geographic distribution, molecular virology and virus-associated pathogenesis. Comparative analysis of HBV genotypes revealed, with exception of HBV/G that shows impaired HBsAg release, that no fundamental disparities between genotypes exist regarding glycosylation, subcellular distribution, release of HBsAg and formation of subviral particles. However, there are distinctions regarding the proportion of L to M to S HBs proteins detected intra- and extracellularly for different genotypes. 2D electrophoresis revealed different posttranslational modification patterns for LHBs. In light of the relevance of HBsAg as diagnostic marker, detectability of purified recombinant HBsAg of various genotypes by HBsAg-specific detection systems licensed in Europe was investigated, showing similar sensitivities for genotypes included in this analysis. These data indicate that recombinant HBsAg reproducibly purified following a defined protocol might be used as an alternative to reference materials currently established.

1 The Lancet. Snake bite—the neglected tropical disease. Lancet 2015; 386: 1110. 2 Mechanisms to reverse the public health neglect of snakebite victims; Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, UK; Sept 22–23, 2015. 3 WHO. WHO model list of essential medicines. 15th list, March 2007. http://www.who.int/ medicines/publications/essentialmedicines/ en/ (accessed Nov 10, 2015). 4 WHO. Rabies and envonomings: a neglected public health issue. Report of a consultative meeting. Jan 10, 2007. http://www.who.int/ bloodproducts/animal_sera/Rabies.pdf (accessed Sept 20, 2015). 5 WHO. Venomous snakes distribution and species risk categories. http://apps.who.int/ bloodproducts/snakeantivenoms/database/ (accessed Sept 20, 2015). 6 WHO. WHO guidelines for the production, control and regulation of snake antivenom immunoglobulins. http://www.who.int/ bloodproducts/snake_antivenoms/ snakeantivenomguideline.pdf (accessed Sept 20, 2015). together key players to identify mechanisms to “reverse the public health neglect of tropical snakebite victims”. But we do not agree with the Editors that snake bites are “largely invisible to WHO”. Antivenoms are highly eff ective in treating snake bite envenoming and were therefore included in the WHO Essential Medicines List in 2007. Also in 2007, WHO convened stakeholders to identify what should be done next; many of their recommendations are still valid. In 2009, WHO published Rabies and envenomings: a neglected public health issue and launched a global database with up-to-date information on venomous snake distribution and species risk categories, available antivenoms, and antivenom producers. In 2010, a WHO guideline to support production, control, and regulation of antivenoms (adopted by the WHO Expert Committee on Biological Standardization) was published. In brief, WHO developed— consensually—a clear vision on how to move this area of public health forward. An obvious next step would be to include antivenoms in the products invited for WHO prequalification. As shown with fixed-dose combination drugs for HIV/AIDS, WHO prequalification facilitates market penetration and increases the availability of quality-assured health products where they are needed most. The WHO Prequalification Team has considerable experience in working with manufacturers and regulators to get needed products onto the market and maintain supply. The team has worked closely with African regulators to help with assessment of complex products. In the longer term, more advanced products—for example, based on monoclonal antibodies—should be developed, but this will need investment and time. Unfortunately, despite all eff orts, we have failed to attract the attention of the donor community and support and implemented to meet the goal of providing 15 million individuals with basic, life-saving needs. WHO received less than 20% of the fi nancial support needed to deal with the crisis in Yemen, leaving a funding gap of 80%. Agencies such as WHO and UNICEF should work in collaboration to avoid duplication of eff orts and to provide frequent, updated reports to allow for adjustment of existing plans.

BACKGROUND: Five cases of human immunodeficiency virus Type 1 (HIV-1) RNA–positive blood donations are described that escaped detection by three different CE-marked nucleic acid amplification technique (NAT) screening assays. These events were associated with two HIV-1 transmissions to recipients of blood components. The implicated NAT assays are monotarget assays and amplify in different viral genome regions (group-specific antigen or long terminal repeat). Investigations into the cause of the false-negative test results were initiated. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Plasma specimens of the five NAT false-negative cases were comparatively investigated in 12 CE-marked HIV-1 NAT systems of differing design. The relative amplification efficiency for the HIV-1 variant was determined for each assay. Sequencing of the variants in the region targeted by each false-negative NAT assay allowed comparison with the respective primers and probes. RESULTS: Some of the NAT assays designed in a similar way to false-negative monotarget NATs also revealed deficiencies in detecting the viral variants. In each case sequencing of the assay target region in the variants demonstrated mismatches with primers and probes used by the assays. Some dual-target assays showed decreased amplification efficiency, but not false-negative results. CONCLUSION: HIV is characterized by its rapid evolution of new viral variants. The evolution of new sequences is unpredictable; NAT screening assays with a single target region appear to be more vulnerable to sequence variations than dual-target assays. Based on this experience with false-negative tests results by monotarget NAT assays, the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut is considering requesting dual-target NAT assays for HIV-1 blood donation screening in Germany.

Results between different clinical laboratory measurement procedures (CLMP) should be equivalent, within clinically meaningful limits, to enable optimal use of clinical guidelines for disease diagnosis and patient management. When laboratory test results are neither standardized nor harmonized, a different numeric result may be obtained for the same clinical sample. Unfortunately, some guidelines are based on test results from a specific laboratory measurement procedure without consideration of the possibility or likelihood of differences between various procedures. When this happens, aggregation of data from different clinical research investigations and development of appropriate clinical practice guidelines will be flawed. A lack of recognition that results are neither standardized nor harmonized may lead to erroneous clinical, financial, regulatory, or technical decisions.Standardization of CLMPs has been accomplished for several measurands for which primary (pure substance) reference materials exist and/or reference measurement procedures (RMPs) have been developed. However, the harmonization of clinical laboratory procedures for measurands that do not have RMPs has been problematic owing to inadequate definition of the measurand, inadequate analytical specificity for the measurand, inadequate attention to the commutability of reference materials, and lack of a systematic approach for harmonization. To address these problems, an infrastructure must be developed to enable a systematic approach for identification and prioritization of measurands to be harmonized on the basis of clinical importance and technical feasibility, and for management of the technical implementation of a harmonization process for a specific measurand.

The performance of hepatitis E virus (HEV) RNA nucleic acid amplification (NAT)-based assays has been investigated using a panel of HEV-containing plasma samples. The panel comprised 22 HEV-positive plasma samples representing 10-fold serial dilutions of HEV genotypes 3a, 3b, 3f, and 4c obtained from blood donors. Two negative-control plasma samples were included. All samples were blinded. The plasma samples were prepared as liquid/frozen materials and distributed to participants on dry ice. Laboratories were requested to test the panel using their routine HEV assays and to score samples as either positive or negative and could optionally return data in copies/ml for HEV RNA. Twenty laboratories from 10 different countries participated in the study. Data were returned by all participating laboratories; 10 laboratories returned quantitative data. All assays except one were developed in-house using conventional or real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) methodologies. There was a 100- to 1,000-fold difference in sensitivity between the majority of assays, independent of the virus strain. Although the quantitative data were limited, for the samples in the range of ∼6 to 4 log 10 copies/ml, the standard deviations of the geometric means of the samples ranged between 0.38 and 1.09. Except for one equivocal result, HEV RNA was not detected in the negative samples. The variability of assay sensitivity highlights the need for the standardization of HEV RNA NAT assays.

BACKGROUND: Mandatory nucleic acid test (NAT) blood screening was introduced in Germany in 1999 for hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA and in 2004 for human immunodeficiency virus Type 1 (HIV-1) RNA. Minimal sensitivity limits of 5000 IU HCV RNA/mL and 10,000 IU HIV-1 RNA/mL were defined for the individual donation facilitating testing of minipools (MPs). The NAT yield obtained from all blood organizations is summarized. Transfusion-associated virus transmissions despite NAT screening (“breakthrough transmissions”) are analyzed. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In Germany, a variety of NAT assays is applied for NAT screening pool sizes of up to 96 donations. Subsets of NAT yield cases were characterized with regard to viral loads by quantitative NAT and with regard to viral genotypes. Confirmed breakthrough transmissions were analyzed using different molecular and serologic assays. RESULTS: Ninety-two HCV NAT yield cases among 40.8 million and 11 HIV-1 NAT yield cases among 17.1 million donations were identified. During this period, one transmission case was confirmed for HCV and one for HIV-1. The two incidents escaped NAT detection because of low-level viremia and/or suboptimal amplification efficiency. Evidence was obtained for a case of HIV-1 nontransmission by a low-level HIV-1 contaminated red blood cell unit. CONCLUSION: NAT screening of MPs identified the vast majority of window-phase donations. A significant number of transmission cases was interdicted; breakthrough transmissions may still occur as rare events, even with individual-donation NAT in place. Sensitivity limits might be adapted to the current “state of the art” taking account of viral dynamics during early infection, incidence rates, and costs.

Different quantitative assays for HCV-RNA are available that report test results in International Units (IU)/ml based on the WHO International Standard. Thus, assays have been calibrated with standard material containing HCV genotype 1, so the consistency of quantitation might differ between assays for other HCV genotypes. Three commercial HCV nucleic acid amplification techniques (HCV-NAT) were compared for quantitation consistency of genotype 4 and 1 specimens from an Egyptian blood donor panel (n = 92). Consistency of quantitation between HCV-NATs was higher for genotype 1 than for genotype 4. Most quantitative results reported by the assays were in the same range, but some genotype 4 samples were missed by two of the assays. The Abbott assay showed higher concentrations for genotype 4 than the two Roche assays. Follow-up investigations of individuals should use the same assay unless another assay has been validated properly. Standardization of HCV-NAT assays remains an issue.

Mit der Umsetzung der EU-Richtlinien 2004/23/EG und 2006/17/EG im Gewebegesetz sowie den begleitenden Verordnungen (Arzneimittel- und Wirkstoffherstellungsverordnung, Transplantationsgesetz-Gewebeverordnung) wurden die grundlegenden Anforderungen an die Virussicherheit der Gewebespenden allgemein definiert. Wahrend infektionsserologische Testungen (Anti-HIV 1/2, Anti-HCV, Hepatitis-B-Oberflachenantigen, Anti-Hepatitis-B-Core-Antigen, Treponema-pallidum-Hamagglutinationsassay) vorgeschrieben sind, wird der Nukleinsaure-Nachweis fur HIV, HBV und HCV nicht explizit gefordert. Anhand in der Literatur berichteter Virusubertragungen, gewebespezifischer Besonderheiten sowie Herstellungs- und gegebenenfalls Inaktivierungsverfahren wird eine Bewertung des Stellenwertes des HIV/HCV/HBV-Nachweises mittels Nukleinsaure-Amplifikationstechniken (NAT) bei Spendern unterschiedlicher Gewebe vorgenommen und mit den Erfahrungen des Blutspendewesens verglichen. Muskuloskelettale Gewebe besitzen infolge des zumeist hohen Blutgehalts der Gewebe, des umfangreichen Entnahmespektrums, der bisher beschriebenen Ubertragungen, der unterschiedlichen Herstellungsverfahren sowie der hohen Spender-Empfanger-Ratio ein signifikantes Risiko, HIV/HCV/HBV zu ubertragen. Daher sollte bei Spendern muskuloskelettaler Gewebe, die keinem effektiven Virusinaktivierungsverfahren unterzogen werden, eine HIV-, HBV- und HCV-NAT-Testung erfolgen. Kardiovaskulares Gewebe hat bei Durchfuhrung der serologischen Testung ein sehr geringes Restrisiko der HIV/HCV/HBV-Ubertragung. Aufgrund der fehlenden Moglichkeit einer effektiven Virusinaktivierung (Erhalt der Gewebemorphologie) und der Spender-Empfanger-Ratio von bis zu 1:10 sollte die HIV-, HCV- und HBV-NAT jedoch als zusatzliche Sicherheitsmasnahme erfolgen. Augenhornhaute besitzen aus physiologisch-morphologischer sowie epidemiologischer Sicht das geringste HIV/HCV/HBV-Ubertragungsrisiko, jedoch sollte die HCV-NAT durchgefuhrt werden. Eine Quarantanelagerung der Gewebe eines Spenders kann bei negativem Ergebnis der HIV/HCV/HBV-NAT grundsatzlich entfallen. Aufgrund der vielfaltigen Synergieeffekte mit der Transfusionsmedizin bietet es sich fur Gewebebanken an, die Testung der infektionsserologischen bzw. molekularbiologischen Laborparameter in Kooperation mit Blutspendediensten durchzufuhren.

Nucleic acid amplification technique (NAT)-based assays (referred to here as NAT assays) are increasingly used as an alternative to culture-based approaches for the detection of mycoplasma contamination of cell cultures. Assay features, like the limit of detection or quantification, vary widely between different mycoplasma NAT assays. Biological reference materials may be useful for harmonization of mycoplasma NAT assays. An international feasibility study included lyophilized preparations of four distantly related mycoplasma species ( Acholeplasma laidlawii , Mycoplasma fermentans , M. orale , M. pneumoniae ) at different concentrations which were analyzed by 21 laboratories using 26 NAT assays with a qualitative, semiquantitative, or quantitative design. An M. fermentans preparation was shown to decrease the interassay variation when used as a common reference material. The preparation was remanufactured and characterized in a comparability study, and its potency (in NAT-detectable units) across different NATs was determined. The World Health Organization (WHO) Expert Committee on Biological Standardization (ECBS) established this preparation to be the “1st World Health Organization international standard for mycoplasma DNA for nucleic acid amplification technique-based assays designed for generic mycoplasma detection” (WHO Tech Rep Ser 987:42, 2014) with a potency of 200,000 IU/ml. This WHO international standard is now available as a reference preparation for characterization of NAT assays, e.g., for determination of analytic sensitivity, for calibration of quantitative assays in a common unitage, and for defining regulatory requirements in the field of mycoplasma testing.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) antigen and antibody combination assays have been launched as a cost-effective alternative to nucleic acid testing (NAT) for reducing the antibody-negative window period (WP). Later, a HCV antigen chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) became available.A panel composed of 337 HCV NAT-yield samples that were characterized for viral load (VL) and genotype was used to compare the sensitivity of two combination enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (Monolisa, Bio-Rad; and Murex, formerly Abbott) and a HCV antigen CLIA (Abbott). Analytic sensitivity was compared with HCV RNA detection using Ultrio (Grifols) by testing serial dilutions of 10 genotype (gt)1 to gt4 samples.HCV antigen CLIA detected 92.4% of samples, whereas Monolisa and Murex detected 38.3 and 47.5%, respectively. In the HCV RNA VL range of 10(5) to 10(7) IU/mL, Monolisa and Murex detected 38% to 56% of gt1, 85% to 78% of gt2, and 21% to 37% of gt3. The overall geometric mean 50% limit of detection (range) of Ultrio on gt1 to gt4 dilution series was 3.5 (1.2-7.7) copies/mL, compared to 3.3 × 10(6) (4.4 × 10(5) -2.7 × 10(7) ), 3.4 × 10(6) (2.2 × 10(5) -4.2 × 10(7) ), and 2728 (415-7243) copies/mL for Monolisa, Murex, and HCV antigen CLIA, respectively.Analytical sensitivity of NAT was on average 1 million- and 780-fold higher than combination assays and HCV antigen CLIA, respectively. Relative sensitivities of combination assays differed for genotypes with Murex being more sensitive for gt1 and gt3 and Monolisa more sensitive for gt2. Although being less sensitive than NAT, combination assays could be considered in resource-limited settings since they detect 38% to 47% of seronegative WP donations.

BACKGROUND: A study was conducted to assess the diagnostic sensitivity of neopterin screening of blood donors with regard to the detection of window-phase specimens of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In total, 1002 diagnostic window-phase specimens from 98 seroconversion panels (29 HIV-1, 52 HCV, and 17 HBV) were analyzed with viral antigen detection, viral nucleic acid amplification testing (NAT), and neopterin quantitation assays. The study was completed by the analysis of 92 anti-hepatitis B core antigen (HBc)-reactive and 103 alanine aminotransferase (ALT)-elevated blood donor specimens. RESULTS: A significant association between elevated neopterin concentrations and the very early phase of HIV-1 infection was found. No significant correlation could be observed between neopterin levels and the early phase of HCV or HBV infection. Neopterin concentration was not increased in specimens from blood donors with anti-HBc reactivity or ALT elevation. CONCLUSIONS: Neopterin screening of blood donors may identify window-phase cases of HIV, but not of HCV or HBV infection. The diagnostic sensitivity of neopterin screening during the HIV window phase is similar to that of the p24 antigen test. With the introduction of viral NATs in blood screening, there is no additional benefit of neopterin screening with regard to the three blood-borne viruses HIV, HCV, and HBV. Acute phases of other infectious agents, however, have been reported to be detected by neopterin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays.

Zusammenfassung Point-of-Care-Tests (POCT) stellen eine Gruppe innerhalb der In-vitro-Diagnostika (IVD) dar. Die Verkehrsfähigkeit von IVD im gemeinsamen europäischen Markt wird durch das CE-Kennzeichen ausgedrückt, das die Übereinstimmung des Tests mit den Vorgaben der europäischen IVD-Richtlinie dokumentiert. POCT unterliegen prinzipiell denselben Anforderungen wie alle anderen Labor-IVD. Die CE-Kennzeichnung wird vom Hersteller angebracht, der damit bestätigt, dass das betreffende Produkt den grundlegenden Anforderungen der Richtlinie entspricht und einem in der Richtlinie vorgesehenen Konformitätsbewertungsverfahren unterzogen wurde. Der Hersteller wird bei der CE-Kennzeichnung bestimmter IVD, deren möglicherweise inkorrektes Testergebnis mit einem höheren Risiko für Patient oder Dritte verbunden sein kann, von einer benannten Stelle unterstützt. Die Marktüberwachung CE-gekennzeichneter IVD wird durch nationale Behörden wahrgenommen, die bei Vorkommnissen Maßnahmen festlegen können.

An acute hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection was diagnosed in a regular apheresis (plasma/platelet) donor by the hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) assay and minipool nucleic acid amplification technology (NAT). The acute infection was confirmed by detection of anti-HBc (IgM) and anti-HBs 2 weeks later. The donor showed no clinical symptoms and had normal alanine aminotransferase levels. He had a history of weekly apheresis plasma or platelet donations. Archived material from the donor and the respective recipients was investigated by sensitive HBV NATs as part of a look-back procedure. HBV DNA was detectable in previous donations as well as in two recipients transfused with platelet concentrates. The rare HBV genotype G was identified in all HBV-DNA-positive samples. Strong evidence of genotype G monoinfection was obtained by clonal sequencing, HBV genotype line probe assay, genotype-specific NATs, and restriction pattern analysis. In contrast to previously described genotype G infections, which all appeared as coinfections with genotype A, neither the hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) nor anti-HBe was detectable in any of the samples. This shows that HBeAg is dispensable for viral replication. The delay in detecting HBsAg in both the donor and recipient samples may be explained by either decreased genotype G-specific synthesis of incomplete viral forms in early HBV infection or the lower sensitivity to genotype G of the current HBsAg assays. In conclusion, this reported case of an HBV infection was caused exclusively by genotype G.

Clinical trials play a central role in clinical development for achieving marketing authorization for a drug. Carefully planned and carried out clinical trials allow for valid conclusions on the efficacy and/or safety of a drug. In order to do so, various requirements have to be fulfilled: clinical studies are to be planned and conducted in accordance with Good Clinical Practice, scientifically sound methods have to be applied, the patients' safety has to be ensured, trial objectives and results have to be clinically relevant, quality and transparency of all steps from planning to reporting a clinical study have to be ensured. For biologicals, special attention has to be paid to specific aspects, such as their mode of action or possible impact on the environment. Various guidelines reflecting regulatory aspects are available to support drug development. In addition, specific questions on drug development might be discussed directly between study sponsors and regulatory agencies. Due to the changes imposed by the 12th law amending the German Drug Law (Arzneimittelgesetz), the relevant German authorities will be more involved in the planning and conduct of clinical trials.

BACKGROUND : Various countries have introduced HCV NAT to exclude infectious donations collected during the preseroconversion window phase (PWP). For the same purpose, an ELISA has also been developed to detect HCV core antigen (cAg). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS : Using sequential samples from regular plasma donors with very recent HCV infections, a total of 494 samples from 52 anti-HCV-negative donors were collected. These panels were used for direct comparison of the performance of PCR and ELISA in detecting viral markers (RNA and cAg) during the PWP of HCV infection. The panels were genotyped, and each sample was analyzed by qualitative and quantitative HCV PCR and by cAg ELISA. The HCV RNA doubling time was calculated from quantitation of viral RNA in consecutive samples during the earliest outbreak of viremia. RESULTS : Concurrent detection of HCV RNA and cAg in 218 and nondetection in 185 samples yielded 81.6-percent concordance in the results of 494 samples. Unidirectional discrepancy of results (i.e., PCR positive and cAg negative) was seen in 91 of 494 (18.4%) samples, which was consistent with 65 specimens with RNA concentrations ranging between 300 and 100,000 IU per mL and 26 specimens with less than 300 IU per mL (limit of quantitative PCR). Individual genotyped panels had different kinetics and courses of viremia. The mean doubling time in the early PWP at the onset of viremia was derived to be 10.8 (range, 5.8-21.0) hours. CONCLUSION : A majority of HCV RNA-positive samples were also cAg-positive during the PWP. The current cAg detection corresponds to 100,000 IU per mL of HCV RNA. Since low-titer samples would be identified only by single-donation NAT, which is often affordable only in developed countries, the cAg ELISA could offer a practical alternative for some countries. The doubling time for HCV RNA at the onset of viremia corresponds to a calculated mean delay of cAg detection during the virus burst phase of 2 or 5 days, when compared with minipool (5000 IU/mL) or single-donation NAT (50 IU/mL), respectively.

BACKGROUND: Causality assessment of reports on suspected virus transmission is crucial for early detection of infectious plasma products. Commonly used algorithms, such as the WHO criteria, do not meet the specific requirements for causality assessment of suspected virus transmission. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A special algorithm, based on nucleic acid amplification and gene sequencing technology, effectiveness of validated virus-inactivation methods, empirical data concerning the safety record of the product, and information on batch-related infection clusters, was developed. The algorithm is focused on laboratory test results or otherwise standardized data, with few clinical data being required. To facilitate practical application, the algorithm has been converted into a graphical decision tree. RESULTS: The feasibility of the algorithm is shown by causality assessment of sample cases. Three cases are presented with the details of each case used in the 12-question checklist. The answers provided by the checklist led to the causality classification. CONCLUSION: The algorithm is a tool for evaluating reports of suspected virus transmission in a standardized manner. It thus has the potential to improve early signal detection in pharmacovigilance of plasma products by confirmation or exclusion of suspected infectivity in most cases.

Validation of HCV-NAT assays is an important prerequisite for the use of NAT for screening plasma or blood donations. The main NAT features to be validated are specificity, detection limit and robustness. Preliminary experience in Germany obtained with different methodical and logistic approaches shows the feasibility of HCV-NAT as a screening test for blood donations.

Background: Several publications describe HIV-1 RNA false-negative results or viral load underquantitation associated with Communauté Européenne(CE)-marked qualitative or quantitative nucleic acid amplification technique (NAT) assays. 6 cases occurred during blood screening in Germany, with 2 of them causing HIV-1 transmissions to recipients of blood components. The implicated NAT assays were mono-target assays amplifying in different viral genome regions (gag or long terminal repeat). Methods: Specimens characterized by HIV-1 NAT underquantitation or false-negative NAT results were comparatively investigated in CE-marked HIV-1 NAT systems of different design to identify potential reasons. The target regions of the viral nucleic acids were sequenced and these sequences compared to primers and probes of the assays. Potential risk minimization measures were considered for quantitative and blood-screening HIV-1 NAT systems. Results: Nucleotide sequencing of the viral target region in cases of HIV-1 RNA underquantitation or false-negative test results revealed new HIV-1 variants that were mismatched with primers and probes used in some mono-target assays. So far, dualtarget NAT assays have not been associated with mismatch-based false-negative test results. From 2015, the Paul Ehrlich Institute will request HIV-1 NAT assays of dual-target design or an analogous solution for further reducing the risk in blood screening. Conclusion: HIV differs from other blood-borne viruses with regard to its fast evolution of new viral variants. The evolution of new sequences is hardly predictable; therefore, NAT assays with only 1 target region appear to be more vulnerable to sequence variations than dual-target assays. The associated risk may be higher for HIV-1 NAT assays used for blood screening compared to quantitative assays used for monitoring HIV-1-infected patients. In HIV-1 screening NAT assays of dual-target design may adequately address the risk imposed by new HIV-1 variants.

Nucleic acid amplification techniques (NAT) in routine blood donor screening considerably reduce the diagnostic window phase period. Nevertheless, several reports of false-negative NAT results were published. Here, four cases of human immunodeficiency virus Type 1 (HIV-1) RNA-positive blood donations that escaped detection by NAT screening are described.A total of 2.7 million blood donations were screened for viral infections between January 2010 and October 2012 in our German Red Cross blood donation service. Four plasma specimens with false-negative NAT results were comparatively investigated with 12 CE-marked NAT assays. In two cases of putative HIV-1 variants the target region of the NAT assay was sequenced allowing comparison with the respective primers and probes.Most of the NAT assays used in routine blood donor screening with the 5'-long terminal repeat (LTR) as target region demonstrated deficiencies in detecting the viral variants and the low-viral-carrier donations. Sequence analysis revealed in one case a deletion of 56 nucleotides within the 5'-LTR preventing the binding of the probe accompanied by a neighbored insertion of another 52 nucleotides and several primer mismatches in another case. No false-negative results were obtained for these cases using dual-target assays. The viral load of the remaining two false-negative results was below the NAT's limit of detection.HIV-1 is characterized by a high mutation rate and rapid generation of new viral variants. By the use of one target region for HIV-1 NAT assays there is a certain risk of false-negative results. Employing HIV-1 multi- and dual-target assays in routine blood donor screening seems to be a reasonable possibility to minimize this problem.

Five cases of human immunodeficiency virus Type 1 (HIV-1) RNA-positive blood donations are described that escaped detection by three different CE-marked nucleic acid amplification technique (NAT) screening assays. These events were associated with two HIV-1 transmissions to recipients of blood components. The implicated NAT assays are monotarget assays and amplify in different viral genome regions (group-specific antigen or long terminal repeat). Investigations into the cause of the false-negative test results were initiated.Plasma specimens of the five NAT false-negative cases were comparatively investigated in 12 CE-marked HIV-1 NAT systems of differing design. The relative amplification efficiency for the HIV-1 variant was determined for each assay. Sequencing of the variants in the region targeted by each false-negative NAT assay allowed comparison with the respective primers and probes.Some of the NAT assays designed in a similar way to false-negative monotarget NATs also revealed deficiencies in detecting the viral variants. In each case sequencing of the assay target region in the variants demonstrated mismatches with primers and probes used by the assays. Some dual-target assays showed decreased amplification efficiency, but not false-negative results.HIV is characterized by its rapid evolution of new viral variants. The evolution of new sequences is unpredictable; NAT screening assays with a single target region appear to be more vulnerable to sequence variations than dual-target assays. Based on this experience with false-negative tests results by monotarget NAT assays, the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut is considering requesting dual-target NAT assays for HIV-1 blood donation screening in Germany.

Mandatory nucleic acid test (NAT) blood screening was introduced in Germany in 1999 for hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA and in 2004 for human immunodeficiency virus Type 1 (HIV-1) RNA. Minimal sensitivity limits of 5000 IU HCV RNA/mL and 10,000 IU HIV-1 RNA/mL were defined for the individual donation facilitating testing of minipools (MPs). The NAT yield obtained from all blood organizations is summarized. Transfusion-associated virus transmissions despite NAT screening ("breakthrough transmissions") are analyzed.In Germany, a variety of NAT assays is applied for NAT screening pool sizes of up to 96 donations. Subsets of NAT yield cases were characterized with regard to viral loads by quantitative NAT and with regard to viral genotypes. Confirmed breakthrough transmissions were analyzed using different molecular and serologic assays.Ninety-two HCV NAT yield cases among 40.8 million and 11 HIV-1 NAT yield cases among 17.1 million donations were identified. During this period, one transmission case was confirmed for HCV and one for HIV-1. The two incidents escaped NAT detection because of low-level viremia and/or suboptimal amplification efficiency. Evidence was obtained for a case of HIV-1 nontransmission by a low-level HIV-1 contaminated red blood cell unit.NAT screening of MPs identified the vast majority of window-phase donations. A significant number of transmission cases was interdicted; breakthrough transmissions may still occur as rare events, even with individual-donation NAT in place. Sensitivity limits might be adapted to the current "state of the art" taking account of viral dynamics during early infection, incidence rates, and costs.

BACKGROUND: In Europe, all plasma pools used for manufacturing of plasma derivatives must be tested negative for hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA by nucleic acid amplification techniques (NAT) with a defined minimal sensitivity. For a subset of pools, quantitative B19V DNA NAT is also mandatory. NAT for further viral targets was introduced by most of the manufacturers on a voluntary basis. The contamination frequency of plasma pools with HCV RNA, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 RNA, and hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA was investigated with representative pools before and after introduction of NAT. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 873 pools from 1996 and 331 pools from 2006 were analyzed for the detection of HCV RNA, HIV RNA, and HBV DNA with an automated multiplex NAT system. The pools were obtained from different manufacturers and the source material was of European and US origin. RESULTS: HCV RNA, HIV-1 RNA, and HBV DNA were detectable in plasma pools from 1996 with the following frequencies: 17.8 percent (HCV RNA), 0.8 percent (HIV-1 RNA), and 0.5 percent (HBV DNA). Viral genome concentrations were up to 3 × 104 IU HCV RNA per mL and 7 × 103 IU HIV RNA per mL, whereas HBV DNA was below the quantitation limit of the quantitative NAT assay. Among the pools from 2006, one pool (0.3%) was found HCV RNA–positive at low titer (

West Nile Virus (WNV) is a mosquito-transmitted flavivirus, widely distributed throughout Africa, Asia and the Middle East. WNV may cause epidemics of human meningoencephalitis. The unexpected emergence of WNV (New York, 1999) and its rapid spread throughout North America during the following years caused a number of blood transfusion- and organ transplant-associated transmissions of WNV. In order to estimate the potential WNV threat for Central Europe, we analyzed the anti-WNV prevalence and WNV-RNA incidence among 14,437 and 9,976 blood donors from Germany. There was a high rate of initially anti-WNV reactives (5.9%), but only a few cases (0.03%) were confirmed as anti-WNV positive by neutralization assay. No WNV-RNA positive blood donor was identified in this study. Whereas WNV-RNA was frequently detected in manufacturing plasma pools from the US, none was detected in pools of European or Asian origin. Virus inactivation steps integrated into the manufacturing process of plasma derivatives were shown to be sufficient to assure the WNV safety of plasma derivatives. A well-characterized WNV reference material was prepared, showing 340 WNV-RNA copies per infectious dose.

In der Originalpublikation dieses Beitrags wurden die Autoren leider nicht innerhalb der Metadaten aufgefuhrt. Die Liste der Autoren lautet wie folgt: Holger F. Rabenau, Norbert Bannert, Annemarie Berger, Oliver Donoso Mantke, Josef Eberle, Martin Enders, Helmut Fickenscher, Hans-Peter Grunert, Lutz Gurtler, Albert Heim, Daniela Huzly, Rolf Kaiser, Klaus Korn, Sigrid Nick, Claudia Kucherer, Micha Nubling, Martin Obermeier, Marcus Panning, Heinz Zeichhardt.

Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) is an at present inevitably lethal neurodegenerative disease which can only be diagnosed definitely post mortem. The majority of the approximately 200 victims to date have resided in the UK where most contaminated beef materials entered the food chain. Three cases in the UK demonstrated that vCJD can be transmitted by blood transfusion. Since BSE and vCJD have spread to several countries outside the UK, it appears advisable that specific risk assessments be carried out in different countries and geographic areas. This review explains the approach adopted by Germany in assessing the risk and considering precautionary measures. A fundamental premise is that the feeding chain of cattle and the food chain have been successfully and permanently cleared from contaminated material. This raises the question of whether transmissions via blood transfusions could have the potential to perpetuate vCJD in mankind. A model calculation based on actual population data showed, however, that this would not be the case. Moreover, an exclusion of transfusion recipients from blood donation would add very little to the safety of blood transfusions, but would have a considerable impact on blood supply. Therefore, an exclusion of transfusion recipients was not recommended in Germany.

A study was conducted to assess the diagnostic sensitivity of neopterin screening of blood donors with regard to the detection of window-phase specimens of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection.In total, 1002 diagnostic window-phase specimens from 98 seroconversion panels (29 HIV-1, 52 HCV, and 17 HBV) were analyzed with viral antigen detection, viral nucleic acid amplification testing (NAT), and neopterin quantitation assays. The study was completed by the analysis of 92 anti-hepatitis B core antigen (HBc)-reactive and 103 alanine aminotransferase (ALT)-elevated blood donor specimens.A significant association between elevated neopterin concentrations and the very early phase of HIV-1 infection was found. No significant correlation could be observed between neopterin levels and the early phase of HCV or HBV infection. Neopterin concentration was not increased in specimens from blood donors with anti-HBc reactivity or ALT elevation.Neopterin screening of blood donors may identify window-phase cases of HIV, but not of HCV or HBV infection. The diagnostic sensitivity of neopterin screening during the HIV window phase is similar to that of the p24 antigen test. With the introduction of viral NATs in blood screening, there is no additional benefit of neopterin screening with regard to the three blood-borne viruses HIV, HCV, and HBV. Acute phases of other infectious agents, however, have been reported to be detected by neopterin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays.

BACKGROUND: The FDA requirement for sensitivity of viral NAT methods used in blood screening is a 95-percent detection limit of 100 copies per mL, whereas the NAT screening system should have a sensitivity of at least 5000 copies per mL per individual donation. According to the Common Technical Specifications of the European Directive 98/79/EC for in vitro diagnostics, viral standard dilutions (calibrated against the WHO standard) should be tested at least 24 times for a statistically valid assessment of the 95-percent detection limit. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Viral standard dilution panels (PeliCheck, VQC-CLB) were prepared for HCV RNA genotypes 1 and 3 and for HIV RNA genotypes B and E. In a multicenter study, 23 laboratories tested the panels all together in 8 to 91 test runs per NAT method. RESULTS: The following 95-percent detection limits (and 95% CIs) were found on the HCV RNA genotype 1 reference panels (shown as geq/mL): Gen-Probe TMA, 85 (64-118); AmpliScreen, 126 (83-225); AmpliScreen with NucliSens Extractor, 21 (13-44); Amplicor with NucliSens Extractor, 69 (50-102), and Amplicor with Qiagen extraction technology, 144 (74-102). On HIV RNA genotype B dilution panels, the following 95-percent detection limits were found (shown as geq/mL): Gen-Probe TMA, 31 (20-52); AmpliScreen, 126 (67-311); AmpliScreen with NucliSens Extractor, 37 (23-69), and NucliSens QL assay, 123 (51-566). HIV RNA genotype E panels were detected with equal sensitivity as HIV RNA genotype B panels. In the Gen-Probe TMA assay, the 50-percent detection limits on HIV RNA type B and type E were 3.6 (2.6-5.0) and 3.9 (2.4-5.8) geq per mL, respectively. The HCV RNA genotype 1 and 3 standards were detected with equal sensitivity. CONCLUSION: The differences in sensitivity between NAT assays can be explained by the input of isolated viral nucleic acid in the amplification reactions. The FDA requirements for sensitivity of NAT blood screening assays can be met by the Gen-probe TMA, as well as by the AmpliScreen assays, particularly when combined with the NucliSens Extractor.