Relationship of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen and Reverse Transcription PCR Positivity for Viral Cultures.

We assessed the relationship between antigen and reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) test positivity and successful virus isolation. We found that antigen test results were more predictive of virus recovery than RT-PCR results. However, virus was isolated from some antigen-negative and RT-PCR‒positive paired specimens, providing support for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention antigen testing algorithm.

Epidemiologic, Immunologic, and Virus Characteristics in Patients With Paired Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Serology and Reverse-Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction Testing.

BACKGROUND: The natural history and clinical progression of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections can be better understood using combined serological and reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing. METHODS: Nasopharyngeal swabs and serum were collected at a single time-point from patients at an urban, public hospital during August-November 2020 and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR, viral culture, and anti-spike pan-immunoglobulin antibody testing. Participant demographics and symptoms were collected through interview. The χ 2 and Fisher exact tests were used to identify associations between RT-PCR and serology results with presence of viable virus and frequency of symptoms. RESULTS: Among 592 participants, 129 (21.8%) had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT-PCR or serology. Presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was strongly associated with lack of viable virus (P = .016). COVID-19 symptom frequency was similar for patients testing RT-PCR positive/seronegative and patients testing RT-PCR positive/seropositive. Patients testing RT-PCR positive/seronegative reported headaches, fatigue, diarrhea, and vomiting at rates not statistically significantly different from those testing RT-PCR negative/seropositive. CONCLUSIONS: While patients testing SARS-CoV-2 seropositive were unlikely to test positive for viable virus and were therefore at low risk for forward transmission, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms were common. Paired SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and antibody testing provides more nuanced understanding of patients' COVID-19 status.

Antigen Test Performance Among Children and Adults at a SARS-CoV-2 Community Testing Site.

BACKGROUND: Performance characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests among children are limited despite the need for point-of-care testing in school and childcare settings. We describe children seeking SARS-CoV-2 testing at a community site and compare antigen test performance to real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and viral culture. METHODS: Two anterior nasal specimens were self-collected for BinaxNOW antigen and RT-PCR testing, along with demographics, symptoms, and exposure information from individuals ≥5 years at a community testing site. Viral culture was attempted on residual antigen or RT-PCR-positive specimens. Demographic and clinical characteristics, and the performance of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests, were compared among children (<18 years) and adults. RESULTS: About 1 in 10 included specimens were from children (225/2110); 16.4% (37/225) were RT-PCR-positive. Cycle threshold values were similar among RT-PCR-positive specimens from children and adults (22.5 vs 21.3, P = .46) and among specimens from symptomatic and asymptomatic children (22.5 vs 23.2, P = .39). Sensitivity of antigen test compared to RT-PCR was 73.0% (27/37) among specimens from children and 80.8% (240/297) among specimens from adults; among specimens from children, specificity was 100% (188/188), positive and negative predictive values were 100% (27/27) and 94.9% (188/198), respectively. Virus was isolated from 51.4% (19/37) of RT-PCR-positive pediatric specimens; all 19 had positive antigen test results. CONCLUSIONS: With lower sensitivity relative to RT-PCR, antigen tests may not diagnose all positive COVID-19 cases; however, antigen testing identified children with live SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Detection of Cytomegalovirus in Urine Dried on Filter Paper.

Urine is the best specimen for the diagnosis of congenital cytomegalovirus, but collection and processing of liquid urine are impractical for screening. Urine dried on filter paper was processed by the same convenient, low-cost method used by newborn screening to test blood spots and showed high sensitivity and specificity.

Sensitivity of Dried Blood Spot Testing for Detection of Congenital Cytomegalovirus Infection.

Importance: The sensitivity of dried blood spots (DBS) to identify newborns with congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) infection has not been evaluated in screening studies using the current, higher-sensitivity methods for DBS processing. Objective: To assess the sensitivity of DBS polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for newborn screening for cCMV infection using saliva as the reference standard for screening, followed by collection of a urine sample for confirmation of congenital infection. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study took place at 5 newborn nurseries and 3 neonatal intensive care units in the Minneapolis/Saint Paul area in Minnesota from April 2016 to June 2019. Newborns enrolled with parental consent were screened for cCMV using DBS obtained for routine newborn screening and saliva collected 1 to 2 days after birth. Dried blood spots were tested for CMV DNA by PCR at both the University of Minnesota (UMN) and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Saliva swabs were tested by CMV DNA PCR at the UMN laboratory only. Newborns who screened positive by saliva or DBS had a diagnostic urine sample obtained by primary care professionals, tested by PCR within 3 weeks of birth. Analysis began July 2019. Exposures: Detection of CMV from a saliva swab using a PCR assay. Main Outcomes and Measures: Number of children with urine-confirmed cCMV and the proportion of them who were CMV positive through DBS screening. Results: Of 12 554 individuals enrolled through June 2019 (of 25 000 projected enrollment), 56 newborns were confirmed to have cCMV (4.5 per 1000 [95% CI, 3.3-5.7]). Combined DBS results from either UMN or CDC had a sensitivity of 85.7% (48 of 56; 95% CI, 74.3%-92.6%), specificity of 100.0% (95% CI, 100.0%-100.0%), positive predictive value (PPV) of 98.0% (95% CI, 89.3%-99.6%), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.9% (95% CI, 99.9%-100.0%). Dried blood spot results from UMN had a sensitivity of 73.2% (95% CI, 60.4%-83.0%), specificity of 100.0% (100.0%-100.0%), PPV of 100.0% (95% CI, 91.4%-100.0%), and NPV of 99.9% (95% CI, 99.8%-99.9%). Dried blood spot results from CDC had a sensitivity of 76.8% (95% CI, 64.2%-85.9%), specificity of 100.0% (95% CI, 100.0%-100.0%), PPV of 97.7% (95% CI, 88.2%-99.6%), and NPV of 99.9% (95% CI, 99.8%-99.9%). Saliva swab results had a sensitivity of 92.9% (52 of 56; 95% CI, 83.0%-97.2%), specificity of 99.9% (95% CI, 99.9%-100.0%), PPV of 86.7% (95% CI, 75.8%-93.1%), and NPV of 100.0% (95% CI, 99.9%-100.0%). Conclusions and Relevance: This study demonstrates relatively high analytical sensitivity for DBS compared with previous studies that performed population-based screening. As more sensitive DNA extraction and PCR methods continue to emerge, DBS-based testing should remain under investigation as a potential low-cost, high-throughput option for cCMV screening.

Epidemiology of cytomegalovirus Infection among mothers and infants in Colombia.

We assessed maternal and infant cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in Colombia. Maternal serum was tested for CMV immunoglobulin G antibodies at a median of 10 (interquartile range: 8-12) weeks gestation (n = 1501). CMV DNA polymerase chain reaction was performed on infant urine to diagnose congenital (≤21 days of life) and postnatal (>21 days) infection. Maternal CMV seroprevalence was 98.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 97.5%-98.8%). Congenital CMV prevalence was 8.4 (95% CI: 3.9%-18.3%; 6/711) per 1000 live births. Among 472 infants without confirmed congenital CMV infection subsequently tested at age 6 months, 258 (54.7%, 95% CI: 50.2%-59.1%) had postnatal infection.

Evaluation of Abbott BinaxNOW Rapid Antigen Test for SARS-CoV-2 Infection at Two Community-Based Testing Sites - Pima County, Arizona, November 3-17, 2020.

Rapid antigen tests, such as the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card (BinaxNOW), offer results more rapidly (approximately 15-30 minutes) and at a lower cost than do highly sensitive nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) (1). Rapid antigen tests have received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for use in symptomatic persons (2), but data are lacking on test performance in asymptomatic persons to inform expanded screening testing to rapidly identify and isolate infected persons (3). To evaluate the performance of the BinaxNOW rapid antigen test, it was used along with real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing to analyze 3,419 paired specimens collected from persons aged ≥10 years at two community testing sites in Pima County, Arizona, during November 3-17, 2020. Viral culture was performed on 274 of 303 residual real-time RT-PCR specimens with positive results by either test (29 were not available for culture). Compared with real-time RT-PCR testing, the BinaxNOW antigen test had a sensitivity of 64.2% for specimens from symptomatic persons and 35.8% for specimens from asymptomatic persons, with near 100% specificity in specimens from both groups. Virus was cultured from 96 of 274 (35.0%) specimens, including 85 (57.8%) of 147 with concordant antigen and real-time RT-PCR positive results, 11 (8.9%) of 124 with false-negative antigen test results, and none of three with false-positive antigen test results. Among specimens positive for viral culture, sensitivity was 92.6% for symptomatic and 78.6% for asymptomatic individuals. When the pretest probability for receiving positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 is elevated (e.g., in symptomatic persons or in persons with a known COVID-19 exposure), a negative antigen test result should be confirmed by NAAT (1). Despite a lower sensitivity to detect infection, rapid antigen tests can be an important tool for screening because of their quick turnaround time, lower costs and resource needs, high specificity, and high positive predictive value (PPV) in settings of high pretest probability. The faster turnaround time of the antigen test can help limit transmission by more rapidly identifying infectious persons for isolation, particularly when used as a component of serial testing strategies.

Donor-derived human herpesvirus 8 and development of Kaposi sarcoma among 6 recipients of organs from donors with high-risk sexual and substance use behavior.

Kaposi sarcoma (KS) can develop following organ transplantation through reactivation of recipient human herpesvirus 8 (HHV-8) infection or through donor-derived HHV-8 transmission. We describe 6 cases of donor-derived HHV-8 infection and KS investigated from July 2018 to January 2020. Organs from 6 donors, retrospectively identified as HHV-8-positive, with a history of drug use disorder, were transplanted into 22 recipients. Four of 6 donors had risk factors for HHV-8 infection reported in donor history questionnaires. Fourteen of 22 organ recipients (64%) had evidence of posttransplant HHV-8 infection. Lung recipients were particularly susceptible to KS. Four of the 6 recipients who developed KS died from KS or associated complications. The US opioid crisis has resulted in an increasing number and proportion of organ donors with substance use disorder, and particularly injection drug use history, which may increase the risk of HHV-8 transmission to recipients. Better awareness of the risk of posttransplant KS for recipients of organs from donors with HHV-8 infection risk could be useful for recipient management. Testing donors and recipients for HHV-8 is currently challenging with no validated commercial serology kits available. Limited HHV-8 antibody testing is available through some US reference laboratories and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Qualitative Variation among Commercial Immunoassays for Detection of Measles-Specific IgG.

Measurement of measles virus-specific IgG is used to assess presumptive evidence of immunity among immunocompetent individuals with uncertain immune or vaccination status. False-negative test results may lead to unnecessary quarantine and exclusion from activities such as employment, education, and travel or result in unnecessary revaccination. In contrast, false-positive results may fail to identify susceptible individuals and promote spread of disease by those who are exposed and unprotected. To better understand the performance characteristics of tests to detect measles IgG, we compared five widely used, commercially available measles IgG test platforms using a set of 223 well-characterized serum samples. Measles virus neutralizing antibodies were also measured by in vitro plaque reduction neutralization, the gold standard method, and compared to IgG test results. Discrepant results were observed for samples in the low-positive ranges of the most sensitive tests, but there was good agreement across platforms for IgG-negative sera and for samples with intermediate to high levels of IgG. False-negative test results occurred in approximately 11% of sera, which had low levels of neutralizing antibody.