Epidemiology of community-acquired pneumonia among hospitalised children in Indonesia: a multicentre, prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify aetiologies of childhood community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) based on a comprehensive diagnostic approach. DESIGN: 'Partnerships for Enhanced Engagement in Research-Pneumonia in Paediatrics (PEER-PePPeS)' study was an observational prospective cohort study conducted from July 2017 to September 2019. SETTING: Government referral teaching hospitals and satellite sites in three cities in Indonesia: Semarang, Yogyakarta and Tangerang. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalised children aged 2-59 months who met the criteria for pneumonia were eligible. Children were excluded if they had been hospitalised for >24 hours; had malignancy or history of malignancy; a history of long-term (>2 months) steroid therapy, or conditions that might interfere with compliance with study procedures. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Causative bacterial, viral or mixed pathogen(s) for pneumonia were determined using microbiological, molecular and serological tests from routinely collected specimens (blood, sputum and nasopharyngeal swabs). We applied a previously published algorithm (PEER-PePPeS rules) to determine the causative pathogen(s). RESULTS: 188 subjects were enrolled. Based on our algorithm, 48 (25.5%) had a bacterial infection, 31 (16.5%) had a viral infection, 76 (40.4%) had mixed bacterial and viral infections, and 33 (17.6%) were unable to be classified. The five most common causative pathogens identified were Haemophilus influenzae non-type B (N=73, 38.8%), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) (N=51, 27.1%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (N=43, 22.9%), Streptococcus pneumoniae (N=29, 15.4%) and Influenza virus (N=25, 13.3%). RSV and influenza virus diagnoses were highly associated with Indonesia's rainy season (November-March). The PCR assays on induced sputum (IS) specimens captured most of the pathogens identified in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that H. influenzae non-type B and RSV were the most frequently identified pathogens causing hospitalised CAP among Indonesian children aged 2-59 months old. Our study also highlights the importance of PCR for diagnosis and by extension, appropriate use of antimicrobials. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03366454.

Etiologies of severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) and misdiagnosis of influenza in Indonesia, 2013-2016.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) accounts for a large burden of illness in Indonesia. However, epidemiology of SARI in tertiary hospitals in Indonesia is unknown. This study sought to assess the burden, clinical characteristics, and etiologies of SARI and concordance of clinical diagnosis with confirmed etiology. METHODS: Data and samples were collected from subjects presenting with SARI as part of the acute febrile Illness requiring hospitalization study (AFIRE). In tertiary hospitals, clinical diagnosis was ascertained from chart review. Samples were analyzed to determine the "true" etiology of SARI at hospitals and Indonesia Research Partnership on Infectious Diseases (INA-RESPOND) laboratory. Distribution and characteristics of SARI by true etiology and accuracy of clinical diagnosis were assessed. RESULTS: Four hundred and twenty of 1464 AFIRE subjects presented with SARI; etiology was identified in 242 (57.6%), including 121 (28.8%) viruses and bacteria associated with systemic infections, 70 (16.7%) respiratory bacteria and viruses other than influenza virus, and 51 (12.1%) influenza virus cases. None of these influenza patients were accurately diagnosed as having influenza during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza was misdiagnosed among all patients presenting with SARI to Indonesian tertiary hospitals in the AFIRE study. Diagnostic approaches and empiric management should be guided by known epidemiology. Public health strategies to address the high burden of influenza should include broad implementation of SARI screening, vaccination programs, clinician education and awareness campaigns, improved diagnostic capacity, and support for effective point-of-care tests.

Review of Current COVID-19 Diagnostics and Opportunities for Further Development.

Diagnostic testing plays a critical role in addressing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Rapid and accurate diagnostic tests are imperative for identifying and managing infected individuals, contact tracing, epidemiologic characterization, and public health decision making. Laboratory testing may be performed based on symptomatic presentation or for screening of asymptomatic people. Confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection is typically by nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT), which requires specialized equipment and training and may be particularly challenging in resource-limited settings. NAAT may give false-negative results due to timing of sample collection relative to infection, improper sampling of respiratory specimens, inadequate preservation of samples, and technical limitations; false-positives may occur due to technical errors, particularly contamination during the manual real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) process. Thus, clinical presentation, contact history and contemporary phyloepidemiology must be considered when interpreting results. Several sample-to-answer platforms, including high-throughput systems and Point of Care (PoC) assays, have been developed to increase testing capacity and decrease technical errors. Alternatives to RT-PCR assay, such as other RNA detection methods and antigen tests may be appropriate for certain situations, such as resource-limited settings. While sequencing is important to monitor on-going evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 genome, antibody assays are useful for epidemiologic purposes. The ever-expanding assortment of tests, with varying clinical utility, performance requirements, and limitations, merits comparative evaluation. We herein provide a comprehensive review of currently available COVID-19 diagnostics, exploring their pros and cons as well as appropriate indications. Strategies to further optimize safety, speed, and ease of SARS-CoV-2 testing without compromising accuracy are suggested. Access to scalable diagnostic tools and continued technologic advances, including machine learning and smartphone integration, will facilitate control of the current pandemic as well as preparedness for the next one.

Coordinating the research response to COVID-19: Mali's approach.

Mali, like the rest of the world, has seen a rapid spread of COVID-19 since the first report of imported cases. Despite being a low-income country, Mali has leveraged scientific research resources via coordinated approaches to enable public health emergency planning and response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Mali's approach includes the harmonization of research activities; leveraging of research laboratory capacity of the University Clinical Research Center, Mali International Center for Excellence and three other in-country laboratories for community COVID-19 testing; strengthening relationships amongst local and international stakeholders; and collaboration with the Ministry of Health to integrate scientific evidence into public policy and emergency management of COVID-19 through a platform of consultation and open communication. The country has implemented national coordination of its COVID-19 response by establishing a COVID-19 Scientific Advisory Committee and a COVID-19 Technical Coordination Committee, both within the Ministry of Health and working collaboratively with other stakeholders. Members of Mali's COVID-19 Scientific Advisory Committee also serve as leaders of its principal academic and government clinical and public health research entities. This centralised approach has enabled the prioritisation of COVID-19 control activities, informed allocation of resources, evidence-based public health practices and timely decision-making in the pandemic setting. Though challenges remain, lessons learned from Mali's harnessing of clinical research capacity to guide and support its COVID-19 response can be applied to future global health research challenges and illustrate the power of building public health-responsive research capacity in resource-limited settings through international collaboration.

Diagnosis of COVID-19 in a Dengue-Endemic Area.

Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in dengue virus (DENV)-endemic areas complicates the diagnosis of both infections. COVID-19 cases may be misdiagnosed as dengue, particularly when relying on DENV IgM, which can remain positive months after infection. To estimate the extent of this problem, we evaluated sera from 42 confirmed COVID-19 patients for evidence of DENV infection. No cases of SARS-CoV-2 and DENV coinfection were identified. However, recent DENV infection, indicated by the presence of DENV IgM and/or high level of IgG antibodies, was found in seven patients. Dengue virus IgM and/or high IgG titer should not exclude COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing is appropriate when dengue nonstructural protein 1 (NS1) or RT-PCR is negative. Given the possibility of coinfection, testing for both DENV and SARS-CoV-2 is merited in the setting of the current pandemic.