Low performance of interferon gamma release assay Quantiferon-TB gold coupled or not with Pst1/3/lipoglycan humoral detection to predict Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex disease in a low-burden area.

Whole T cell interferon gamma release assays such as QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QTF-TB) are used to evaluate Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTC) exposure but fail to discriminate latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) from active disease. In this study conducted in a low-burden area, 1215 patients presenting MTC risk and tested both for QTF-TB and mycobacterial infection (microscopy, culture, and/or PCR) were selected, as well as 1298 controls screened with QTF-TB before medical recruitment. The humoral response (LIODetect®TB-ST) was further evaluated in 199 selected patients. In patients with active disease, MTC positivity (culture and/or PCR with species identification) was associated with QTF-TB positivity (45/56, 80.4 %). Although QTF-TB1/TB2 peptides were not suitable for discriminating against active MTC disease from LTBI, the cut-off value of 4.4 IFN-γ IU/mL produced the best diagnostic performance for MTC detection. Lower levels of QTF-TB were reported among patients with isolated active pulmonary MTC as compared to a lymph-nodal location and a disseminated form. Next, antibodies were detected in 4/55 (7.3 %) active MTC disease cases, while negative in cases of LTBI and indeterminate/negative QTF-TB. In conclusion, the added value to combine cellular (QTF-TB) and humoral (LIODetect®TB-ST) assays to predict an active MTC disease is limited.

Evaluation of two anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody immunoassays for monitoring patients on pre-exposure prophylaxis.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is crucial to prevent severe COVID-19 in immunocompromised patients. A reliable method is needed to quantify anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels for personalized monitoring during PrEP. We measured the binding antibody concentrations of 63 immunocompromised patients receiving 300mg or 600mg tixagevimab/cilgavimab on PrEP day and twice during the following 3 months. All blood samples were tested using the Abbott anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant assay, the Roche Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S assay, and live virus-based neutralization assays. The results of the two immunoassays were correlated on day 0, 1 month, and 3 months post-PrEP. Passing-Bablok regression demonstrated higher anti-S concentration values measured with the Roche immunoassay compared to those measured with the Abbott immunoassay. Antibody concentrations were higher after 600 mg tixagevimab/cilgavimab prophylaxis than after 300 mg. The neutralizing antibody titers obtained using the omicron BA.5 and BA.2.75 strains were low. Both automated immunoassays are suitable for monitoring immunocompromised patients on PrEP.

Current immunoassays and detection of antibodies elicited by Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The present study aimed to determine whether current commercial immunoassays are adequate for detecting anti-Omicron antibodies. We analyzed the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody response of 23 unvaccinated individuals 1-2 months after an Omicron infection. All blood samples were tested with a live virus neutralization assay using a clinical Omicron BA.1 strain and four commercial SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays. We assessed three anti-Spike immunoassays (SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant [Abbott S], Wantaï anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody ELISA [Wantaï], Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S assay [Roche]) and one anti-Nucleocapsid immunoassay (Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay [Abbott N]). Omicron neutralizing antibodies were detected in all samples with the live virus neutralization assay. The detection rate of the Abbott S, Wantai, Roche, and Abbott N immunoassays were 65.2%, 69.6%, 86.9%, and 91.3%, respectively. The sensitivities of Abbott S and Wantai immunoassays were significantly lower than that of the live virus neutralization assay (p = 0.004, p = 0.009; Fisher's exact test). Antibody concentrations obtained with anti-S immunoassays were correlated with Omicron neutralizing antibody concentrations. These data provide clinical evidence of the loss of performance of some commercial immunoassays to detect antibodies elicited by Omicron infections. It highlights the need to optimize these assays by adapting antigens to the circulating SARS-CoV-2 strains.

Diagnostic Performance of an Automated System for Assaying Anti-Hepatitis E Virus Immunoglobulins M and G Compared with a Conventional Microplate Assay.

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the Liaison® Murex anti-HEV IgM and IgG assays running on the Liaison® instrument and compare the results with those obtained with Wantai HEV assays. We tested samples collected in immunocompetent and immunocompromised patients during the acute (HEV RNA positive, anti-HEV IgM positive) and the post-viremic phase (HEV RNA negative, anti-HEV IgM positive) of infections. The specificity was assessed by testing HEV RNA negative/anti-HEV IgG-IgM negative samples. The clinical sensitivity of the Liaison® IgM assay was 100% for acute-phase samples (56/56) and 57.4% (27/47) for post-viremic samples from immunocompetent patients. It was 93.8% (30/32) for acute-phase (viremic) samples and 71%% (22/31) for post-viremic samples from immunocompromised patients. The clinical sensitivity of the Liaison® IgG assay was 100% for viremic samples (56/56) and 94.6% (43/47) for post-viremic samples from immunocompetent patients. It was 84.3% (27/32) for viremic samples and 93.5% (29/31) for post-viremic samples from immunocompromised patients. Specificity was very high (>99%) in both populations. We checked the limit of detection stated for the Liaison® IgG assay (0.3 U/mL). The clinical performance of the Liaison® ANTI-HEV assays was good. These rapid, automated assays for detecting anti-HEV antibodies will greatly enhance the arsenal for diagnosing HEV infections.

Evaluation of Three Quantitative Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Immunoassays.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 2019 and caused a dramatic pandemic. Serological assays are used to check for immunization and assess herd immunity. We evaluated commercially available assays designed to quantify antibodies directed to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S) antigen, either total (Wantaï SARS-CoV-2 Ab ELISA) or IgG (SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant on Alinity, Abbott, and Liaison SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG, Diasorin). The specificities of the Wantaï, Alinity, and Liaison assays were evaluated using 100 prepandemic sera and were 98, 99, and 97%, respectively. The sensitivities of all three were around 100% when tested on 35 samples taken 15 to 35 days postinfection. They were less sensitive for 150 sera from late infections (>180 days). Using the first WHO international standard (NIBSC), we showed that the Wantai results were concordant with the NIBSC values, while Liaison and Alinity showed a proportional bias of 1.3 and 7, respectively. The results of the 3 immunoassays were significantly globally pairwise correlated and for late infection sera (P < 0.001). They were correlated for recent infection sera measured with Alinity and Liaison (P < 0.001). However, the Wantai results of recent infections were not correlated with those from Alinity or Liaison. All the immunoassay results were significantly correlated with the neutralizing antibody titers obtained using a live virus neutralization assay with the B1.160 SARS-CoV-2 strain. These assays will be useful once the protective anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer has been determined. IMPORTANCE Standardization and correlation with virus neutralization assays are critical points to compare the performance of serological assays designed to quantify anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in order to identify their optimal use. We have evaluated three serological immunoassays based on the virus spike antigen that detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: a microplate assay and two chemiluminescent assays performed with Alinity (Abbott) and Liaison (Diasorin) analysers. We used an in-house live virus neutralization assay and the first WHO international standard to assess the comparison. This study could be useful to determine guidelines on the use of serological results to manage vaccination and treatment with convalescent plasma or monoclonal antibodies.

The real seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in France and its consequences for virus dynamics.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus has spread world-wide since December 2019, killing more than 2.9 million of people. We have adapted a statistical model from the SIR epidemiological models to predict the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in France. Our model is based on several parameters and assumed a 4.2% seroprevalence in Occitania after the first lockdown. The recent use of serological tests to measure the effective seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in the population of Occitania has led to a seroprevalence around 2.4%. This implies to review the parameters of our model to conclude at a lower than expected virus transmission rate, which may be due to infectivity varying with the patient's symptoms or to a constraint due to an uneven population geographical distribution.

High immunogenicity of a messenger RNA-based vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in chronic dialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic kidney disease, dialysis patients and kidney transplant patients are at high risk of developing severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Data regarding the immunogenicity of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 messenger RNA (anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA) vaccines in dialysis patients were published recently. We assessed the immunogenicity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine in dialysis patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and nine patients on haemodialysis (n = 85) or peritoneal dialysis (n = 24) have received two injections of 30-µg doses of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) that were administered intramuscularly 28 days apart. Those who were still seronegative after the second dose were given a third dose 1 month later. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were tested before and after vaccination. RESULTS: Ninety-one out of the 102 patients who had at least a 1-month follow-up after the second (n = 97) or the third (n = 5) vaccine doses had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The seroconversion rate was 88.7% (86 out of 97 patients) among SARS-CoV-2 seronegative patients at the initiation of vaccination. Receiving immunosuppressive therapy was an independent predictive factor for non-response to vaccination. CONCLUSION: Due to high immunogenicity and safety of mRNA vaccines, we strongly recommend prioritizing a two-dose vaccination of dialysis patients. A third dose can be required in non-responders to two doses. When possible, patients waiting for a kidney transplantation should be offered the vaccine before transplantation.

Estimating the impact of public health strategies on the spread of SARS-CoV-2: Epidemiological modelling for Toulouse, France.

The spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the resulting disease COVID-19 has killed over 2 million people as of 22 January 2021. We have used a modified susceptible, infected, recovered epidemiological model to predict how the spread of the virus in France will vary depending on the public health strategies adopted, including anti-COVID-19 vaccination. Our prediction model indicates that the French authorities' adoption of a gradual release from lockdown could lead in March 2021 to a virus prevalence similar to that before lockdown. However, a massive vaccination campaign initiated in January 2021 and the continuation of public health measures over several months could curb the spread of virus and thus relieve the load on hospitals.

Side effect of a 6 p.m curfew for preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2: A modeling study from Toulouse, France.

The spread of SARS-CoV-2 and the resulting disease Covid-19 has killed over 2 million people as of January 22, 2021. We have designed a model and used it to quantify the effect of a 6 p.m curfew on the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in Toulouse, France. The data show that this measure can lead to the opposite effect from that intended due to larger groups of people on the authorized hours.

Performance of anti-HEV assays for diagnosing acute hepatitis E in immunocompromised patients.

Hepatitis E virus is an emerging concern in immunocompromised patients, who may become chronically infected. This prompted us to assess the performance of two anti-HEV IgG and IgM assays for diagnosing acute HEV infections. The specificities of the assays were estimated by testing samples from 2 to 3 year-old French children and blood donors and their sensitivities by testing 40 immunocompromised patients acutely infected. Both anti-HEV IgM assays were highly specific (99.6% and 100%). The sensitivity of the Adaltis was 87.5%, and that of Wantai was 85%. The specificities of anti-HEV IgG Wantai (97.8%) and Adaltis tests (89.5%, p=0.1) were similar but the Wantai test was more sensitive (45%) than the Adaltis test (15%, p<0.001). None of the samples was anti-HEV IgM negative and IgG positive. We conclude that these anti-HEV IgM assays performed well in immunosuppressed subjects with acute hepatitis E and can be used as first line virological tools. Testing for anti-HEV IgG and IgM simultaneously at the acute phase did not improve the diagnostic performance. In contrast, molecular detection of HEV RNA appears essential to exclude an HEV infection in patients who are negative for anti-HEV IgM and to assess the evolution of hepatitis E 3 months thereafter.

Hepatitis E virus antibodies in blood donors, France.

Using a validated sensitive assay, we found hepatitis E virus (HEV) IgG in 52.5% of voluntary blood donors in southwestern France. This finding suggests HEV is highly endemic to this region. The high HEV prevalence may reflect local dietary practices, such as eating uncooked pork and game products.

Analytical sensitivity of four HIV combined antigen/antibody assays using the p24 WHO standard.

BACKGROUND: The Common Technical Specifications for HIV-1 p24 assays published in 2009 fixed the lower limit of detection for obtaining C.E. approval at 2 IU/ml against the WHO standard (first international reference, code NIBSC 90/636); it was previously 50 pg/ml. Some recent fourth generation HIV assays that simultaneously detect antigen and antibody are equivalent to p24 assays, but they were mainly evaluated using p24 antigen standards in pg/ml and little is known of their performance with the IU/ml standard. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate four of the combined serological assays most commonly used for HIV diagnosis in France against the WHO standard in IU/ml. STUDY DESIGN: The analytical sensitivity of four combined p24 antigen and antibody assays (ARCHITECT HIV Ag/Ab Combo, AxSYM HIV Ag/Ab Combo, VIDAS HIV DUO Quick and VIDAS HIV DUO Ultra) and of one p24 assay (VIDAS HIV p24 II) were determined using dilutions of the WHO standard. RESULTS: Four of the five assays had a lower limit of detection below 2 IU/ml: 1.24 for ARCHITECT Combo, 0.66 for VIDAS DUO Ultra, 0.43 for VIDAS DUO Quick and 0.73 to 1.15 for VIDAS p24, while that of AxSYM was close to 2 (1.94-2.25). CONCLUSIONS: We have provided the first data on the lower limit of detection of HIV combined assays using the IU/ml WHO standard and demonstrated the need for a single international standard for comparing assays. We recommend the use of this approach in medical laboratory to validate on site their methods.