Clinical Management of Hospitalized Patients With High-Consequence Infectious Diseases in England.

Infectious disease physicians in England have been diagnosing and managing occasional cases of viral hemorrhagic fever since 1971, including the United Kingdom's first case of Ebola virus disease in 1976. Specialist isolation facilities to provide safe and effective care have been present since that time. Following the emergence of Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) in 2012, and the avian influenza A (H7N9) outbreak in 2013, and the 2014-2016 Ebola virus disease outbreak in West Africa, clinical and public health preparedness and response pathways in England have been strengthened for these types of diseases, now called high-consequence infectious diseases (HCIDs). The HCID program, led by NHS England and Public Health England between 2016 and 2018, helped to deliver these enhancements, which have since been used on multiple occasions for new UK cases and outbreaks of MERS, mpox, avian influenza, and Lassa fever. Additionally, HCID pathways were activated for COVID-19 during the first 3 months of 2020, before the pandemic had been declared and little was known about COVID-19 but HCID status had been assigned temporarily to COVID-19 as a precaution. The HCID program also led to the commissioning of a network of new airborne HCID treatment centers in England, to supplement the existing network of contact HCID treatment centers, which includes the United Kingdom's only 2 high-level isolation units. In this case study, the authors describe the airborne and contact HCID treatment center networks in England, including their formation and structures, their approach to safe and effective clinical management of patients with HCIDs in the United Kingdom, and challenges they may face going forward.

Comparison of Brazilian High- and Maximum-Containment Laboratories Biosafety and Biosecurity Regulations to Legal Frameworks in the United States and Other Countries: Gaps and Opportunities.

Introduction: Although the United States and other countries have implemented comprehensive legislation, regulations, and policies to support biosafety and biosecurity of high- and maximum-containment laboratories, Brazil's legislation has notable gaps and inconsistencies. Objective: To evaluate the Brazilian approach to ensuring nationwide biosafety and biosecurity oversight and governance of high- and maximum-containment laboratories. Methods: A systematic gap analysis was conducted to compare Brazilian biosafety and biosecurity legislation, regulations, and policies with their international counterparts, with a particular focus on the oversight and governance of high- and maximum-containment laboratories. Results: We found that Brazilian biosafety and biosecurity legislation, regulations, and policies have relevant gaps. Governance and regulatory oversight of Brazil's high- and maximum-containment laboratories are decentralized with variable levels of adherence to commonly accepted global biosafety and biosecurity compliance standards. These findings represent a limitation not only to governance but also to the preparedness to face current and future challenges related to emergent infectious diseases in Brazil. Enhancing the Brazilian legal framework on laboratory biosafety and biosecurity is necessary and urgent. Reviewing the lessons learned and regulations applied in the United States and other international frameworks helped identify potential areas for improving Brazil's ability to inventory and manage its diverse biocontainment laboratory capabilities and assure these valuable resources align with national needs and priorities. Conclusion: The Brazilian government has an opportunity to revise and improve upon a national set of legislation, regulations, and policies for its high- and maximum-containment laboratories, taking advantage of legislation and guidelines published by other countries.

Practical Considerations for Navigating Withdrawal from the Federal Select Agent Program.

Introduction: Clear guidance is provided by the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) to assist registered entities in nearly all facets of compliance with the Federal select agent regulations (7 CFR Part 331; 9 CFR Part 121; 42 CFR Part 73). If a registered entity chooses to discontinue its registration, detailed instructions for registration withdrawal are deeply embedded within a document entitled "eFSAP Form 1 Amendment Instructions," which is found on the FSAP website within the electronic Federal Select Agent Program (eFSAP) Resource Center. Methods: Using the information found within the eFSAP Form 1 Amendment Instructions, as well as extensive written and verbal guidance provided by the lead assigned entity point of contact at the FSAP, we completed the FSAP withdrawal process during a 12-month period between 2022 and 2023. Discussion: This commentary shares our recent professional experiences navigating the FSAP withdrawal process at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (UTHealth Houston). Successes, challenges, and lessons learned are shared so that others planning or considering withdrawing may benefit from our experience. Conclusion: The resources provided for withdrawal within the eFSAP Form 1 Amendment Instructions are relatively basic, and additional details are not currently found in other FSAP guidance documents. Therefore, direct communication and support from the FSAP to the entity Responsible Officials are imperative to ensure a safe, secure, and compliant withdrawal.

Impact of template denaturation prior to whole genome amplification on gene detection in high GC-content species, Burkholderia mallei and B. pseudomallei.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we sought to determine the types and prevalence of antimicrobial resistance determinants (ARDs) in Burkholderia spp. strains using the Antimicrobial Resistance Determinant Microarray (ARDM). RESULTS: Whole genome amplicons from 22 B. mallei (BM) and 37 B. pseudomallei (BP) isolates were tested for > 500 ARDs using ARDM v.3.1. ARDM detected the following Burkholderia spp.-derived genes, aac(6), blaBP/MBL-3, blaABPS, penA-BP, and qacE, in both BM and BP while blaBP/MBL-1, macB, blaOXA-42/43 and penA-BC were observed in BP only. The method of denaturing template for whole genome amplification greatly affected the numbers and types of genes detected by the ARDM. BlaTEM was detected in nearly a third of BM and BP amplicons derived from thermally, but not chemically denatured templates. BlaTEM results were confirmed by PCR, with 81% concordance between methods. Sequences from 414-nt PCR amplicons (13 preparations) were 100% identical to the Klebsiella pneumoniae reference gene. Although blaTEM sequences have been observed in B. glumae, B. cepacia, and other undefined Burkholderia strains, this is the first report of such sequences in BM/BP/B. thailandensis (BT) clade. These results highlight the importance of sample preparation in achieving adequate genome coverage in methods requiring untargeted amplification before analysis.

Select Agent Regulatory Challenges in a Patient Care Setting: Review and Recommendations.

The Federal Select Agent Program ensures the safe and secure possession, use, and transfer of biological select agents and toxins through the select agent regulations (42 CFR §73, 7 CFR §331, and 9 CFR §121). These regulations are primarily written for interpretation by diagnostic and research laboratories, with limited text pertaining to the care of individuals infected with a select agent. The regulations applicable to patient care settings are ambiguous, resulting in challenges with regulatory compliance. The COVID-19 pandemic called attention to these shortcomings and the need to clarify and modify the select agent regulations. In this article, we discuss 3 select agent regulation phrases regarding patient care that need clarification-specifically, the window of time to transfer, patient care setting, and conclusion of patient care-and provide recommendations for improvement. These recommendations include implementing minimum security standards to safeguard patient specimens against theft, loss, or release prior to the appropriate transfer or destruction of the material and increasing the time allowed for the transfer or destruction of specimens before entities are subject to the select agent regulations. We encourage the Federal Select Agent Program to release a policy statement clarifying the select agent regulations regarding patient care discussed herein and to lengthen the designated time to destroy or transfer agents to a registered entity. Addressing these challenges will aid in compliance with the select agent regulations in patient care settings.

Application of multi-criteria decision analysis techniques and decision support framework for informing plant select agent designation and decision making.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Division of Agricultural Select Agents and Toxins (DASAT) established a list of biological agents (Select Agents List) that threaten crops of economic importance to the United States and regulates the procedures governing containment, incident response, and the security of entities working with them. Every 2 years the USDA DASAT reviews their select agent list, utilizing assessments by subject matter experts (SMEs) to rank the agents. We explored the applicability of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) techniques and a decision support framework (DSF) to support the USDA DASAT biennial review process. The evaluation includes both current and non-select agents to provide a robust assessment. We initially conducted a literature review of 16 pathogens against 9 criteria for assessing plant health and bioterrorism risk and documented the findings to support this analysis. Technical review of published data and associated scoring recommendations by pathogen-specific SMEs was found to be critical for ensuring accuracy. Scoring criteria were adopted to ensure consistency. The MCDA supported the expectation that select agents would rank high on the relative risk scale when considering the agricultural consequences of a bioterrorism attack; however, application of analytical thresholds as a basis for designating select agents led to some exceptions to current designations. A second analytical approach used agent-specific data to designate key criteria in a DSF logic tree format to identify pathogens of low concern that can be ruled out for further consideration as select agents. Both the MCDA and DSF approaches arrived at similar conclusions, suggesting the value of employing the two analytical approaches to add robustness for decision making.

Chimeric Viruses Containing Select Agents: The Biology Behind Their Creation, Attenuation, and Exclusion From Regulation.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of the Federal Select Agent Program, and under the purview of 42 CFR §73.3, has the ability to regulate chimeric viruses that contain portions of pathogens that are part of the select agents and toxins list. In addition, the CDC is responsible for excluding pathogens from regulation, including chimeric viruses, that are sufficiently attenuated. Since 2003, the CDC has excluded over 20 chimeric viruses that contain portions of select agents. But in late 2021, the CDC proposed a regulatory first-the addition of a chimeric virus to the select agents and toxins list. To better understand the importance and applicability of this action, we surveyed the landscape of previous exclusions from select agent regulation. First, we reviewed the exclusion criteria used by the Intragovernmental Select Agents and Toxins Technical Advisory Committee in their advisement of the Federal Select Agent Program. We then reviewed the literature on chimeric viruses that contain portions of select agents and that have been excluded from regulation due to sufficient attenuation, focusing on chimeric alphaviruses and chimeric avian influenza viruses. By analyzing biological commonalities and patterns in the structure and methodology of the development of previously excluded chimeric viruses, we provide insight into how the CDC has used exclusion criteria in the past to regulate chimeric viruses. We conclude by contrasting previous exclusions with the recent addition of SARS-CoV-1/SARS-CoV-2 chimeric viruses to the select agents and toxins list, demonstrating that this addition strays from established, effective regulatory processes, and is thus a regulatory misstep.

Regulating Select Agent Chimeras: Defining the Problem(s) Through the Lens of SARS-CoV-1/SARS-CoV-2 Chimeric Viruses.

In late 2021, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted an interim final rule (86 FR 64075) to the federal register regulating the possession, use, and transfer of SARS-CoV-1/SARS-CoV-2 chimeric viruses. In doing so, the CDC provided the reasoning that viral chimeras combining the transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 with the pathogenicity and lethality of SARS-CoV-1 pose a significant risk to public health and should thus be placed on the select agents and toxins list. However, 86 FR 64075 lacked clarity in its definitions and scope, some of which the CDC addressed in response to public comments in the final rule, 88 FR 13322, in early 2023. To evaluate these regulatory actions, we reviewed the existing select agent regulations to understand the landscape of chimeric virus regulation. Based on our findings, we first present clear definitions for the terms "chimeric virus," "viral chimera," and "virulence factor" and provide a list of SARS-CoV-1 virulence factors in an effort to aid researchers and federal rulemaking for these agents moving forward. We then provide suggestions for a combination of similarity and functional characteristic cutoffs that the government could use to enable researchers to distinguish between regulated and nonregulated chimeras. Finally, we discuss current select agent regulations and their overlaps with 86 FR 64075 and 88 FR 13322 and make suggestions for how to address chimera concerns within and/or without these regulations. Collectively, we believe that our findings fill important gaps in current federal regulations and provide forward-looking philosophical and practical analysis that can guide future decisionmaking.

Art of the Kill: Designing and Testing Viral Inactivation Procedures for Highly Pathogenic Negative Sense RNA Viruses.

The study of highly pathogenic viruses handled under BSL-4 conditions and classified as Select Agents frequently involves the transfer of inactivated materials to lower containment levels for downstream analyses. Adhering to Select Agent and BSL-4 safety regulations requires validation or verification of the inactivation procedures, which comes with an array of challenges for each method. This includes the use of cytotoxic reagents for chemical inactivation and defining the precise inactivation parameters for physical inactivation. Here, we provide a workflow for various inactivation methods using Ebola, Nipah, and Lassa viruses as our examples. We choose three distinct inactivation methods (TRIzol/TRIzol LS, aldehyde fixation using different fixatives, and heat) to highlight the challenges of each method and provide possible solutions. We show that, whereas published chemical inactivation methods are highly reliable, the parameters for heat inactivation must be clearly defined to ensure complete inactivation. In addition to the inactivation data, we also provide examples and templates for the documentation required for approval and use of inactivation SOPs, including an inactivation report, the procedure sections of developed SOPs, and an electronic inactivation certificate that accompanies inactivated samples. The provided information can be used as a roadmap for similar studies at high and maximum containment laboratories.

Review of Restricted Experiment Requests, Division of Select Agents and Toxins, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014-2021.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Division of Select Agents and Toxins (DSAT) regulates laboratories that possess, use, or transfer select agents and toxins within United States as part of the Federal Select Agent Program. DSAT also mitigates biosafety risks through the review of "restricted experiments," which under the select agent regulations are experiments that pose heightened biosafety risks. In a previous study, we evaluated restricted experimental requests submitted to DSAT for review between 2006 and 2013. The purpose of this study is to provide an updated analysis of requests to conduct potential restricted experiments submitted to DSAT between 2014 and 2021. This article describes the trends and characteristics of the data associated with restricted experimental requests involving select agents and toxins that have an impact on public health and safety (US Department of Health and Human Services agents only) or both public health and safety and animal health or products (overlap agents). From January 2014 to December 2021, DSAT received 113 requests to conduct potential restricted experiments; however, 82% (n=93) of those requests were determined not to meet the regulatory definition of a restricted experiment. Of the 20 requests that met the definition of a restricted experiment, 8 were denied because the experiments had the potential to compromise disease control in humans. DSAT continues to encourage entities to practice due diligence and request a review of research that could potentially meet the regulatory definition of a restricted experiment out of an abundance of caution to protect public health and safety and prevent any potential compliance action.

Improving U.S. Biosafety and Biosecurity: Revisiting Recommendations from the Federal Experts Security Advisory Panel and the Fast Track Action Committee on Select Agent Regulations.

Introduction: In response to a series of biosafety incidents in 2014, the White House directed two high-level expert committees to analyze biosafety and biosecurity in U.S. laboratories and make recommendations for work with select agents and toxins. Overall, they recommended 33 actions to address areas related to national biosafety, including promoting a culture of responsibility, oversight, outreach and education, applied biosafety research, incident reporting, material accountability, inspection processes, regulations and guidelines, and determining the necessary number of high-containment laboratories in the United States. Methods: The recommendations were collected and grouped into categories previously defined by the Federal Experts Security Advisory Panel and the Fast Track Action Committee. Open-source materials were examined to determine what actions had been taken to address the recommendations. The actions taken were compared against the reasoning provided in the committee reports to determine if the concerns were sufficiently addressed. Results: In this study, we found that 6 recommendations were not addressed and 11 were insufficiently addressed out of 33 total recommended actions. Discussion and Conclusion: Further work is needed to strengthen biosafety and biosecurity in U.S. laboratories handling regulated pathogens (biological select agents and toxins [BSAT]). These carefully considered recommendations should now be enacted, including determining if there is sufficient high-containment laboratory space for response to a future pandemic, developing a sustained applied biosafety research program to improve our understanding of how high-containment research should be performed, bioethics training to educate the regulated community on the consequences of unsafe practices in BSAT research, and the creation of a no-fault incident reporting system for biological incidents, which may inform and improve biosafety training. Significance: The work presented in this study is significant because previous incidents that occurred in Federal laboratories highlighted shortcomings in the Federal Select Agent Program and the Select Agent Regulations. Progress was made on implementing recommendations to address the shortcomings, but efforts were lost or forgotten over time. The COVID-19 pandemic has provided a brief window of interest in biosafety and biosecurity, and an opportunity to address these shortcomings to increase readiness for future disease emergencies.

Pathogenic Bacilli as an Emerging Biothreat?

Bacillus anthracis, present as a very durable endospore in soil, causes zoonotic illness which is mainly associated with herbivores and domestic animals. Human cases are scarce and often involve populations close to infected livestock. If anthrax is no longer of public health concern in developed countries, B. anthracis is one of the top-tier biological weapon agents. It is classified by the CDC as a category A agent. Since 1994, emerging strains of Bacillus cereus have been associated with anthrax-like disease in mammals. Some clinical strains of B. cereus harbor anthrax-like plasmid genes (pXO1 and pXO2) associated with non-human primate and human infections, with the same clinical presentation of inhalation anthrax and mortality rates. Although currently restricted to certain limited areas of circulation, the emergence of these new strains of B. cereus extends the list of potential agents possibly usable for bioterrorism or as a biological weapon. It is therefore important to improve our knowledge of the phylogeny within the B. cereus sensu lato group to better understand the origin of these strains. We can then more efficiently monitor the emergence of new strains to better control the risk of infection and limit potentially malicious uses.

The development and use of decision support framework for informing selection of select agent toxins with modelling studies to inform permissible toxin amounts.

Many countries have worked diligently to establish and implement policies and processes to regulate high consequence pathogens and toxins that could have a significant public health impact if misused. In the United States, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-132, 1996), as amended by the Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-188, 2002) requires that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) [through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)] establish a list of bacteria, viruses, and toxins that have the potential to pose a severe threat to public health and safety. Currently, this list is reviewed and updated on a biennial basis using input from subject matter experts (SMEs). We have developed decision support framework (DSF) approaches to facilitate selection of select toxins and, where toxicity data are known, conducted modelling studies to inform selection of toxin amounts that should be excluded from select agent regulations. Exclusion limits allow laboratories to possess toxins under an established limit to support their research or teaching activities without the requirement to register with the Federal Select Agent Program. Fact sheets capturing data from a previously vetted SME workshop convened by CDC, literature review and SME input were developed to assist in evaluating toxins using the DSF approach. The output of the DSF analysis agrees with the current select toxin designations, and no other toxins evaluated in this study were recommended for inclusion on the select agent and toxin list. To inform the selection of exclusion limits, attack scenarios were developed to estimate the amount of toxin needed to impact public health. Scenarios consisted of simulated aerosol releases of a toxin in high-population-density public facilities and the introduction of a toxin into a daily consumable product supply chain. Using published inhalation and ingestion median toxic dose (TD50) and median lethal dose (LD50) values, where available, a range of toxin amounts was examined to estimate the number of people exposed to these amounts in these scenarios. Based on data generated by these models, we proposed toxin exclusion values corresponding to levels below those that would trigger a significant public health response (i.e., amounts estimated to expose up to ten people by inhalation or one hundred people by ingestion to LD50 or TD50 levels of toxin in the modeled scenarios).

Peronosporaceae species causing downy mildew diseases of Poaceae, including nomenclature revisions and diagnostic resources.

Downy mildew pathogens of graminicolous hosts (Poaceae) are members of eight morphologically and phylogenetically distinct genera in the Peronosporaceae (Oomycota, Peronosporales). Graminicolous downy mildews (GDMs) cause severe losses in crops such as maize, millets, sorghum, and sugarcane in many parts of the world, especially in tropical climates. In countries where the most destructive GDMs are not endemic, these organisms are often designated as high-risk foreign pathogens and subject to oversight and quarantine by regulatory officials. Thus, there is a need to reliably and accurately identify the causal organisms. This paper provides an overview of the Peronosporaceae species causing graminicolous downy mildew diseases, with a description of their impact on agriculture and the environment, along with brief summaries of the nomenclatural and taxonomic issues surrounding these taxa. Key diagnostic characters are summarized, including DNA sequence data for types and/or voucher specimens, morphological features, and new illustrations. New sequence data for cox2 and 28S rDNA markers are provided from the type specimens of three species, Peronosclerospora philippinensis, Sclerospora iseilematis, and Sclerospora northii. Thirty-nine species of graminicolous downy mildews are accepted, and seven previously invalidly published taxa are validated. Fifty-five specimens are formally designated as types, including lectotypification of 10 species, neotypification of three species, and holotype designation for Sclerophthora cryophila. Citation: Crouch JA, Davis WJ, Shishkoff N, Castroagudín VL, Martin F, Michelmore R, Thines M (2022). Peronosporaceae species causing downy mildew diseases of Poaceae, including nomenclature revisions and diagnostic resources. Fungal Systematics and Evolution 9: 43-86. doi: 10.3114/fuse.2022.09.05.

Application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Techniques for Informing Select Agent Designation and Decision Making.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Select Agent Program establishes a list of biological agents and toxins that potentially threaten public health and safety, the procedures governing the possession, utilization, and transfer of those agents, and training requirements for entities working with them. Every 2 years the Program reviews the select agent list, utilizing subject matter expert (SME) assessments to rank the agents. In this study, we explore the applicability of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) techniques and logic tree analysis to support the CDC Select Agent Program biennial review process, applying the approach broadly to include non-select agents to evaluate its generality. We conducted a literature search for over 70 pathogens against 15 criteria for assessing public health and bioterrorism risk and documented the findings for archiving. The most prominent data gaps were found for aerosol stability and human infectious dose by inhalation and ingestion routes. Technical review of published data and associated scoring recommendations by pathogen-specific SMEs was found to be critical for accuracy, particularly for pathogens with very few known cases, or where proxy data (e.g., from animal models or similar organisms) were used to address data gaps. Analysis of results obtained from a two-dimensional plot of weighted scores for difficulty of attack (i.e., exposure and production criteria) vs. consequences of an attack (i.e., consequence and mitigation criteria) provided greater fidelity for understanding agent placement compared to a 1-to-n ranking and was used to define a region in the upper right-hand quadrant for identifying pathogens for consideration as select agents. A sensitivity analysis varied the numerical weights attributed to various properties of the pathogens to identify potential quantitative (x and y) thresholds for classifying select agents. The results indicate while there is some clustering of agent scores to suggest thresholds, there are still pathogens that score close to any threshold, suggesting that thresholding "by eye" may not be sufficient. The sensitivity analysis indicates quantitative thresholds are plausible, and there is good agreement of the analytical results with select agent designations. A second analytical approach that applied the data using a logic tree format to rule out pathogens for consideration as select agents arrived at similar conclusions.

Beyond the List: Bioagent-Agnostic Signatures Could Enable a More Flexible and Resilient Biodefense Posture Than an Approach Based on Priority Agent Lists Alone.

As of 2021, the biothreat policy and research communities organize their efforts around lists of priority agents, which elides consideration of novel pathogens and biotoxins. For example, the Select Agents and Toxins list is composed of agents that historic biological warfare programs had weaponized or that have previously caused great harm during natural outbreaks. Similarly, lists of priority agents promulgated by the World Health Organization and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases are composed of previously known pathogens and biotoxins. To fill this gap, we argue that the research/scientific and biodefense/biosecurity communities should categorize agents based on how they impact their hosts to augment current list-based paradigms. Specifically, we propose integrating the results of multi-omics studies to identify bioagent-agnostic signatures (BASs) of disease-namely, patterns of biomarkers that accurately and reproducibly predict the impacts of infection or intoxication without prior knowledge of the causative agent. Here, we highlight three pathways that investigators might exploit as sources of signals to construct BASs and their applicability to this framework. The research community will need to forge robust interdisciplinary teams to surmount substantial experimental, technical, and data analytic challenges that stand in the way of our long-term vision. However, if successful, our functionality-based BAS model could present a means to more effectively surveil for and treat known and novel agents alike.

Validation and Application of a Benchtop Cell Sorter in a Biosafety Level 3 Containment Setting.

Introduction: Fluorescent-activated cell sorting (FACS) is often the most appropriate technique to obtain pure populations of a cell type of interest for downstream analysis. However, aerosol droplets can be generated during the sort, which poses a biosafety risk when working with samples containing risk group 3 pathogens such as Francisella tularensis, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Yersinia pestis, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. For many researchers, placing the equipment required for FACS at biosafety level 3 (BSL-3) is often not possible due to expense, space, or expertise available. Methods: We performed aerosol testing as part of the biosafety evaluation of the MACSQuant Tyto, a completely closed, cartridge-based cell sorter. We also established quality control procedures to routinely evaluate instrument performance. Results: The MACSQuant Tyto does not produce aerosols as part of the sort procedure. Discussion: These data serve as guidance for other facilities with containment laboratories wishing to use the MACSQuant Tyto for cell sorting. Potential users should consult with their Institutional Biosafety Committees to perform in-house risk assessments of this equipment. Conclusion: The MACSQuant Tyto can safely be used on the benchtop to sort samples at BSL-3.

Biological Select Agents and Toxins Management in Taiwan: From Past to Present.

Introduction: Before 2016, there were no specific regulations or guidelines for the management of biological select agents and toxins (BSATs) in Taiwan. The Taiwan Centers for Disease Control responded to the global health security agenda in 2016 and made use of the Joint External Evaluation tool: International Health Regulations to evaluate Taiwan's epidemic prevention system capacities, including BSAT management. For technical areas that did not meet the highest requirements, the regulations and guidelines are now in place to strengthen the management of BSATs. Methods: In 2017, a survey on the BSAT entities management status in Taiwan was conducted to understand the gap between BSAT practice and international policies, and to improve BSAT management based on the findings. Results and Discussion: After 3 years of promotion, relevant management regulations and supervision mechanisms have been established. In 2021, the evaluation will be conducted again and it is expected that Taiwan's BSAT management capacity will reach the level of international biosafety and biosecurity.