Literature Review of Pathogen Agnostic Molecular Testing of Clinical Specimens From Difficult-to-Diagnose Patients: Implications for Public Health.

To better identify emerging or reemerging pathogens in patients with difficult-to-diagnose infections, it is important to improve access to advanced molecular testing methods. This is particularly relevant for cases where conventional microbiologic testing has been unable to detect the pathogen and the patient's specimens test negative. To assess the availability and utility of such testing for human clinical specimens, a literature review of published biomedical literature was conducted. From a corpus of more than 4,000 articles, a set of 34 reports was reviewed in detail for data on where the testing was being performed, types of clinical specimens tested, pathogen agnostic techniques and methods used, and results in terms of potential pathogens identified. This review assessed the frequency of advanced molecular testing, such as metagenomic next generation sequencing that has been applied to clinical specimens for supporting clinicians in caring for difficult-to-diagnose patients. Specimen types tested were from cerebrospinal fluid, respiratory secretions, and other body tissues and fluids. Publications included case reports and series, and there were several that involved clinical trials, surveillance studies, research programs, or outbreak situations. Testing identified both known human pathogens (sometimes in new sites) and previously unknown human pathogens. During this review, there were no apparent coordinated efforts identified to develop regional or national reports on emerging or reemerging pathogens. Therefore, development of a coordinated sentinel surveillance system that applies advanced molecular methods to clinical specimens which are negative by conventional microbiological diagnostic testing would provide a foundation for systematic characterization of emerging and underdiagnosed pathogens and contribute to national biodefense strategy goals.

Surveillance for Emerging and Reemerging Pathogens Using Pathogen Agnostic Metagenomic Sequencing in the United States: A Critical Role for Federal Government Agencies.

The surveillance and identification of emerging, reemerging, and unknown infectious disease pathogens is essential to national public health preparedness and relies on fluidity, coordination, and interconnectivity between public and private pathogen surveillance systems and networks. Developing a national sentinel surveillance network with existing resources and infrastructure could increase efficiency, accelerate the identification of emerging public health threats, and support coordinated intervention strategies that reduce morbidity and mortality. However, implementing and sustaining programs to detect emerging and reemerging pathogens in humans using advanced molecular methods, such as metagenomic sequencing, requires making large investments in testing equipment and developing networks of clinicians, laboratory scientists, and bioinformaticians. In this study, we sought to gain an understanding of how federal government agencies currently support such pathogen agnostic testing of human specimens in the United States. We conducted a landscape analysis of federal agency websites for publicly accessible information on the availability and type of pathogen agnostic testing and details on flow of clinical specimens and data. The website analysis was supplemented by an expert review of results with representatives from the federal agencies. Operating divisions within the US Department of Health and Human Services and the US Department of Veterans Affairs have developed and sustained extensive clinical and research networks to obtain patient specimens and perform metagenomic sequencing. Metagenomic facilities supported by US agencies were not equally geographically distributed across the United States. Although many entities have work dedicated to metagenomics and/or support emerging infectious disease surveillance specimen collection, there was minimal formal collaboration across agencies.

COVID-19 Self-Test Data: Challenges and Opportunities - United States, October 31, 2021-June 11, 2022.

Self-tests* to detect current infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, are valuable tools that guide individual decision-making and risk reduction† (1-3). Increased self-test use (4) has likely contributed to underascertainment of COVID-19 cases (5-7), because unlike the requirements to report results of laboratory-based and health care provider-administered point-of-care COVID-19 tests,§ public health authorities do not require reporting of self-test results. However, self-test instructions include a recommendation that users report results to their health care provider so that they can receive additional testing and treatment if clinically indicated.¶ In addition, multiple manufacturers of COVID-19 self-tests have developed websites or companion mobile applications for users to voluntarily report self-test result data. Federal agencies use the data reported to manufacturers, in combination with manufacturing supply chain information, to better understand self-test availability and use. This report summarizes data voluntarily reported by users of 10.7 million self-tests from four manufacturers during October 31, 2021-June 11, 2022, and compares these self-test data with data received by CDC for 361.9 million laboratory-based and point-of-care tests performed during the same period. Overall trends in reporting volume and percentage of positive results, as well as completeness of reporting demographic variables, were similar across test types. However, the limited amount and quality of data reported from self-tests currently reduces their capacity to augment existing surveillance. Self-tests provide important risk-reduction information to users, and continued development of infrastructure and methods to collect and analyze data from self-tests could improve their use for surveillance during public health emergencies.

Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Antigens in a Multiplex Bead Assay for Integrated Serological Surveillance of Neglected Tropical and Other Diseases.

Serosurveillance can provide estimates of population-level exposure to infectious pathogens and has been used extensively during the COVID-19 pandemic. Simultaneous, serological testing for multiple pathogens can be done using bead-based immunoassays to add value to disease-specific serosurveys. We conducted a validation of four SARS-CoV-2 antigens-full-length spike protein, two receptor binding domain proteins, and the nucleocapsid protein-on our existing multiplex bead assay (MBA) for enteric diseases, malaria, and vaccine preventable diseases. After determining the optimal conditions for coupling the antigens to microsphere beads, the sensitivity and specificity of the assay were determined on two instruments (Luminex-200 and MAGPIX) when testing singly (monoplex) versus combined (multiplex). Sensitivity was assessed using plasma from 87 real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) positive persons collected in March-May of 2020 and ranged from 94.3% to 96.6% for the different testing conditions. Specificity was assessed using 98 plasma specimens collected prior to December 2019 and plasma from 19 rRT-PCR negative persons and ranged from 97.4% to 100%. The positive percent agreement was 93.8% to 97.9% using 48 specimens collected > 21 days post-symptom onset, while the negative percent agreement was ≥ 99% for all antigens. Test performance was similar using monoplex or multiplex testing. Integrating SARS-CoV-2 serology with other diseases of public health interest could add significant value to public health programs that have suffered severe programmatic setbacks during the COVID-19 pandemic.

High-throughput quantitation of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a single-dilution homogeneous assay.

SARS-CoV-2 emerged in late 2019 and has since spread around the world, causing a pandemic of the respiratory disease COVID-19. Detecting antibodies against the virus is an essential tool for tracking infections and developing vaccines. Such tests, primarily utilizing the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) principle, can be either qualitative (reporting positive/negative results) or quantitative (reporting a value representing the quantity of specific antibodies). Quantitation is vital for determining stability or decline of antibody titers in convalescence, efficacy of different vaccination regimens, and detection of asymptomatic infections. Quantitation typically requires two-step ELISA testing, in which samples are first screened in a qualitative assay and positive samples are subsequently analyzed as a dilution series. To overcome the throughput limitations of this approach, we developed a simpler and faster system that is highly automatable and achieves quantitation in a single-dilution screening format with sensitivity and specificity comparable to those of ELISA.

Building a Public-Private Partnership to Enhance Laboratory Preparedness and Response in the United States.

The public health community has recognized that it cannot handle responses to all possible public health emergencies on its own. The public health sector has deep scientific expertise and excels at initial identification, complex characterization, and test development. The private sector has many resources and capabilities that can complement and augment the public health response. This is especially true in the clinical laboratory sector. Many commercial laboratories are designed for high-volume, high-throughput diagnostic testing in a way that public health laboratories are not. Significant steps have been taken since 2017 to improve the communication and coordination between public health and the private clinical laboratory community, especially during a response to a public health emergency. This paper describes the strong foundation that has been built for an improved clinical and public health laboratory response to the next public health emergency.

Evaluation of standardized sample collection, packaging, and decontamination procedures to assess cross-contamination potential during Bacillus anthracis incident response operations.

Sample collection procedures and primary receptacle (sample container and bag) decontamination methods should prevent contaminant transfer between contaminated and non-contaminated surfaces and areas during bio-incident operations. Cross-contamination of personnel, equipment, or sample containers may result in the exfiltration of biological agent from the exclusion (hot) zone and have unintended negative consequences on response resources, activities and outcomes. The current study was designed to: (1) evaluate currently recommended sample collection and packaging procedures to identify procedural steps that may increase the likelihood of spore exfiltration or contaminant transfer; (2) evaluate the efficacy of currently recommended primary receptacle decontamination procedures; and (3) evaluate the efficacy of outer packaging decontamination methods. Wet- and dry-deposited fluorescent tracer powder was used in contaminant transfer tests to qualitatively evaluate the currently-recommended sample collection procedures. Bacillus atrophaeus spores, a surrogate for Bacillus anthracis, were used to evaluate the efficacy of spray- and wipe-based decontamination procedures. Both decontamination procedures were quantitatively evaluated on three types of sample packaging materials (corrugated fiberboard, polystyrene foam, and polyethylene plastic), and two contamination mechanisms (wet or dry inoculums). Contaminant transfer results suggested that size-appropriate gloves should be worn by personnel, templates should not be taped to or removed from surfaces, and primary receptacles should be selected carefully. The decontamination tests indicated that wipe-based decontamination procedures may be more effective than spray-based procedures; efficacy was not influenced by material type but was affected by the inoculation method. Incomplete surface decontamination was observed in all tests with dry inoculums. This study provides a foundation for optimizing current B. anthracis response procedures to minimize contaminant exfiltration.

Prevalence of Staphylococcus aureus nasal colonization in the United States, 2001-2002.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus is a common cause of disease, particularly in colonized persons. Although methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) infection has become increasingly reported, population-based S. aureus and MRSA colonization estimates are lacking. METHODS: Nasal samples for S. aureus culture and sociodemographic data were obtained from 9622 persons > or = 1 year old as part of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2001-2002. After screening for oxacillin susceptibility, MRSA and selected methicillin-susceptible S. aureus isolates were tested for antimicrobial susceptibility, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis clonal type, toxin genes (e.g., for Panton-Valentine leukocidin [PVL]), and staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec (SCCmec) type I-IV genes. RESULTS: For 2001-2002, national S. aureus and MRSA colonization prevalence estimates were 32.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 30.7%-34.1%) and 0.8% (95% CI, 0.4%-1.4%), respectively, and population estimates were 89.4 million persons (95% CI, 84.8-94.1 million persons) and 2.3 million persons (95% CI, 1.2-3.8 million persons), respectively. S. aureus colonization prevalence was highest in participants 6-11 years old. MRSA colonization was associated with age > or = 60 years and being female but not with recent health-care exposure. In unweighted analyses, the SCCmec type IV gene was more frequent in isolates from participants of younger age and of non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity; the PVL gene was present in 9 (2.4%) of 372 of isolates tested. CONCLUSIONS: Many persons in the United States are colonized with S. aureus; prevalence rates differ demographically. MRSA colonization prevalence, although low nationally in 2001-2002, may vary with demographic and organism characteristics.

Intervention to reduce the incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin infections in a correctional facility in Georgia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In August 2001, a cluster of MRSA skin infections was detected in a correctional facility. An investigation was conducted to determine its cause and to prevent further MRSA infections. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: A 200-bed detention center. PATIENTS: A case was defined as a detainee with a skin lesion from which MRSA was cultured from July 24 through December 31, 2001. Case-patients were identified by review of laboratory culture results and by skin lesion screening through point-prevalence survey and admission examination. Controls were randomly selected from an alphabetized list of detainees. INTERVENTION: Medical staff implemented measures to improve skin disease screening, personal hygiene, wound care, and antimicrobial therapy. RESULTS: Sixteen cases were identified: 11, 5, and 0 in the preintervention, peri-intervention, and postintervention periods, respectively. Seven case-patients and 19 controls were included in the case-control study. On multivariable analysis, working as a dormitory orderly (OR, 9.8; CI95, 0.74-638; P = .10) and a stay of longer than 36 days (OR, 6.9; CI95, 0.65-128.2; P = .14) were the strongest predictors for MRSA skin infection. The preintervention, peri-intervention, and postintervention MRSA infection rates were 11.6, 8.8, and 0 per 10,000 detainee-days, respectively. The rate of MRSA skin infections declined significantly between both the preintervention and peri-intervention periods and the postintervention period (P < .01 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: MRSA skin disease can become an emergent problem in a correctional facility. Interventions targeted at skin disease screening, appropriate antimicrobial treatment, and hygiene may decrease the risk of acquiring MRSA infection in correctional facilities.

Vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in the absence of vancomycin exposure.

We report findings from our investigation of the world's second clinical isolate of vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (VRSA). An elderly man was hospitalized with an infected chronic heel ulcer and osteomyelitis. Before hospital admission, he received multiple courses of antibiotic therapy but, notably, no vancomycin. Numerous cultures of ulcer specimens (performed on an outpatient basis) grew methicillin-resistant, vancomycin-susceptible S. aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus species. At admission, an additional culture of a specimen from the heel ulcer grew S. aureus that was identified as VRSA (minimal inhibitory concentration for vancomycin [by broth-microdilution], 32 microg/mL). Further evaluation confirmed the presence of the vanA gene mediating vancomycin resistance. To assess VRSA transmission, we performed a carriage study of 283 identified contacts and an environmental survey of the patient's home; no VRSA isolates were recovered. This case illustrates that recent exposure by patients to vancomycin is not necessary for development of vanA-containing VRSA. For clinical and public health reasons, it is essential that microbiology laboratories adequately test for vancomycin-resistance in S. aureus.

Vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolate from a patient in Pennsylvania.

A vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (VRSA) isolate was obtained from a patient in Pennsylvania in September 2002. Species identification was confirmed by standard biochemical tests and analysis of 16S ribosomal DNA, gyrA, and gyrB sequences; all of the results were consistent with the S. aureus identification. The MICs of a variety of antimicrobial agents were determined by broth microdilution and macrodilution methods following National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) guidelines. The isolate was resistant to vancomycin (MIC = 32 micro g/ml), aminoglycosides, beta-lactams, fluoroquinolones, macrolides, and tetracycline, but it was susceptible to linezolid, minocycline, quinupristin-dalfopristin, rifampin, teicoplanin, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. The isolate, which was originally detected by using disk diffusion and a vancomycin agar screen plate, was vancomycin susceptible by automated susceptibility testing methods. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) of SmaI-digested genomic DNA indicated that the isolate belonged to the USA100 lineage (also known as the New York/Japan clone), the most common staphylococcal PFGE type found in hospitals in the United States. The VRSA isolate contained two plasmids of 120 and 4 kb and was positive for mecA and vanA by PCR amplification. The vanA sequence was identical to the vanA sequence present in Tn1546. A DNA probe for vanA hybridized to the 120-kb plasmid. This is the second VRSA isolate reported in the United States.

Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis typing of oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates from the United States: establishing a national database.

Oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (ORSA) is a virulent pathogen responsible for both health care-associated and community onset disease. We used SmaI-digested genomic DNA separated by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) to characterize 957 S. aureus isolates and establish a database of PFGE patterns. In addition to PFGE patterns of U.S. strains, the database contains patterns of representative epidemic-type strains from the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia; previously described ORSA clonal-type isolates; 13 vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus (VISA) isolates, and two high-level vancomycin-resistant, vanA-positive strains (VRSA). Among the isolates from the United States, we identified eight lineages, designated as pulsed-field types (PFTs) USA100 through USA800, seven of which included both ORSA and oxacillin-susceptible S. aureus isolates. With the exception of the PFT pairs USA100 and USA800, and USA300 and USA500, each of the PFTs had a unique multilocus sequence type and spa type motif. The USA100 PFT, previously designated as the New York/Tokyo clone, was the most common PFT in the database, representing 44% of the ORSA isolates. USA100 isolates were typically multiresistant and included all but one of the U.S. VISA strains and both VRSA isolates. Multiresistant ORSA isolates from the USA200, -500, and -600 PFTs have PFGE patterns similar to those of previously described epidemic strains from Europe and Australia. The USA300 and -400 PFTs contained community isolates resistant only to beta-lactam drugs and erythromycin. Noticeably absent from the U.S. database were isolates with the previously described Brazilian and EMRSA15 PFGE patterns. These data suggest that there are a limited number of ORSA genotypes present in the United States.

The World Health Organization's External Quality Assurance System Proficiency Testing Program has improved the accuracy of antimicrobial susceptibility testing and reporting among participating laboratories using NCCLS methods.

A total of 150 laboratories in 33 countries that followed the NCCLS testing procedures participated in the World Health Organization's External Quality Assurance System for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EQAS-AST) from January 1998 through March 2001. Laboratories tested seven bacterial isolates for antimicrobial resistance and reported the results to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, Ga. The results were compared to the results generated at the CDC with the NCCLS broth microdilution and disk diffusion reference methods. Although there were few testing errors with Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica serovar Enteritidis, drugs that are not appropriate for therapy of Salmonella infections were tested and reported by 136 (91%) of 150 laboratories. In addition, 29 (20%) of 150 laboratories used the Staphylococcus aureus breakpoints to report oxacillin results for Staphylococcus saprophyticus. For a vanB-containing Enterococcus faecalis strain, 124 (83%) of 150 laboratories correctly reported vancomycin results that were +/-1 doubling dilution from the reference MIC or +/-3 mm from the reference disk diffusion result. Of the laboratories that tested Streptococcus agalactiae by disk diffusion, 17% reported nonsusceptible results for penicillin in error. While 110 laboratories (73%) tested the S. pneumoniae challenge isolate against a fluoroquinolone, 83% tested it against ciprofloxacin, for which there are no NCCLS interpretive criteria. Ten of 12 laboratories testing levofloxacin and 4 of 4 laboratories testing ofloxacin by an MIC method correctly reported resistant results for the isolate. Feedback letters sent to participating laboratories highlighted areas of susceptibility testing in individual laboratories that needed improvement. The positive impact of the feedback letters and the overall effectiveness of the EQAS program were documented in repeat testing challenges with pneumococci and staphylococci. The 31 and 19% increases in the numbers of laboratories using appropriate testing methods for pneumococci and staphylococci, respectively, in 2000 versus 1998 indicate that laboratory performance is improving.