Travel Surveillance and Genomics Uncover a Hidden Zika Outbreak during the Waning Epidemic.

The Zika epidemic in the Americas has challenged surveillance and control. As the epidemic appears to be waning, it is unclear whether transmission is still ongoing, which is exacerbated by discrepancies in reporting. To uncover locations with lingering outbreaks, we investigated travel-associated Zika cases to identify transmission not captured by reporting. We uncovered an unreported outbreak in Cuba during 2017, a year after peak transmission in neighboring islands. By sequencing Zika virus, we show that the establishment of the virus was delayed by a year and that the ensuing outbreak was sparked by long-lived lineages of Zika virus from other Caribbean islands. Our data suggest that, although mosquito control in Cuba may initially have been effective at mitigating Zika virus transmission, such measures need to be maintained to be effective. Our study highlights how Zika virus may still be "silently" spreading and provides a framework for understanding outbreak dynamics. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

Zika Virus IgM Detection and Neutralizing Antibody Profiles 12-19 Months after Illness Onset.

Data on the duration of detectable Zika virus-specific IgM in infected persons are limited. Neutralizing antibody cross-reactivity occurs between Zika virus and related flaviviruses, but the degree to which this confounds diagnosis is uncertain. We tested serum specimens collected 12-19 months after illness onset from patients with confirmed Zika virus disease for Zika virus IgM and Zika virus and dengue virus neutralizing antibodies. Among 62 participants, 45 (73%) had detectable Zika virus IgM and 12 (19%) had an equivocal result. Although all patients tested had Zika virus neutralizing antibodies, 39 (63%) also had neutralizing antibodies against dengue virus; of those, 12 (19%) had <4-fold difference between Zika virus and dengue virus titers, and 5 (8%) had dengue virus titer >4-fold higher than Zika virus titer. Prolonged detection of IgM and neutralizing antibody cross-reactivity make it difficult to determine the timing of Zika virus infection and differentiate between related flaviviruses.

Zika Virus IgM 25 Months after Symptom Onset, Miami-Dade County, Florida, USA.

We assessed IgM detection in Zika patients from the 2016 outbreak in Miami-Dade County, Florida, USA. Of those with positive or equivocal IgM after 12-19 months, 87% (26/30) had IgM 6 months later. In a survival analysis, ≈76% had IgM at 25 months. Zika virus IgM persists for years, complicating serologic diagnosis.

Local Mosquito-Borne Transmission of Zika Virus - Miami-Dade and Broward Counties, Florida, June-August 2016.

During the first 6 months of 2016, large outbreaks of Zika virus disease caused by local mosquito-borne transmission occurred in Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories, but local mosquito-borne transmission was not identified in the continental United States (1,2). As of July 22, 2016, the Florida Department of Health had identified 321 Zika virus disease cases among Florida residents and visitors, all occurring in either travelers from other countries or territories with ongoing Zika virus transmission or sexual contacts of recent travelers.* During standard case investigation of persons with compatible illness and laboratory evidence of recent Zika virus infection (i.e., a specimen positive by real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction [rRT-PCR], or positive Zika immunoglobulin M [IgM] with supporting dengue serology [negative for dengue IgM antibodies and positive for dengue IgG antibodies], or confirmation of Zika virus neutralizing antibodies by plaque reduction neutralization testing [PRNT]) (3), four persons were identified in Broward and Miami-Dade counties whose infections were attributed to likely local mosquito-borne transmission. Two of these persons worked within 120 meters (131 yards) of each other but had no other epidemiologic connections, suggesting the possibility of a local community-based outbreak. Further epidemiologic and laboratory investigations of the worksites and surrounding neighborhood identified a total of 29 persons with laboratory evidence of recent Zika virus infection and likely exposure during late June to early August, most within an approximate 6-block area. In response to limited impact on the population of Aedes aegypti mosquito vectors from initial ground-based mosquito control efforts, aerial ultralow volume spraying with the organophosphate insecticide naled was applied over a 10 square-mile area beginning in early August and alternated with aerial larviciding with Bacillus thuringiensis subspecies israelensis (Bti), a group biologic control agent, in a central 2 square-mile area. No additional cases were identified after implementation of this mosquito control strategy. No increases in emergency department (ED) patient visits associated with aerial spraying were reported, including visits for asthma, reactive airway disease, wheezing, shortness of breath, nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea. Local and state health departments serving communities where Ae. aegypti, the primary vector of Zika virus, is found should continue to actively monitor for local transmission of the virus.(†).

Partnerships Involved in Public Health Testing for Zika Virus in Florida, 2016.

The emergence of Zika virus in the Americas in 2015 and its association with birth defects and other adverse health outcomes triggered an unprecedented public health response and a demand for testing. In 2016, when Florida exceeded state public health laboratory capacity for diagnostic testing, the state formed partnerships with federal and commercial laboratories. Eighty-two percent of the testing (n = 33 802 of 41 008 specimens) by the laboratory partners, including Florida's Bureau of Public Health Laboratories (BPHL; n = 13 074), a commercial laboratory (n = 19 214), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC; n = 1514), occurred from July through November 2016, encompassing the peak period of local transmission. These partnerships allowed BPHL to maintain acceptable test turnaround times of 1 to 4 days for nucleic acid testing and 3 to 7 days for serologic testing. Lessons learned from this response to inform future outbreaks included the need for early planning to establish outside partnerships, adding specimen triage strategies to surge plans, and integrating state and CDC information systems.

Epidemiology of Pediatric Zika Virus Infections.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In July 2016, local transmission of Zika virus (ZIKV) was announced in Miami-Dade County, Florida. In this report, we describe the epidemiology of pediatric ZIKV infections in locally acquired and travel-associated cases. METHODS: All children aged 1 to 17 years tested for ZIKV between October 1, 2015, and March 29, 2017, were included. SAS 9.4 was used to analyze age, sex, race and/or ethnicity, origin of exposure, onset date, affiliation with a household cluster, clinical symptoms, hospitalizations, viremia, viruria, and antibody detection in specimens. RESULTS: Among 478 confirmed ZIKV cases in Miami-Dade County, 33 (6.9%) occurred in children (1-17 years). Twenty-seven (82.3%) cases were travel-associated. The median age of a pediatric Zika case patient was 11 years. Seventeen (51.5%) case patients were boys, and 23 (69.9%) were Hispanic. Among 31 symptomatic cases, all reported having rash, 25 (80.6%) reported fever, 9 (29.0%) reported conjunctivitis, and 7 (22.6%) reported arthralgia. Sixteen (48.5%) cases reported 2 of 4 and 8 (24.2%) reported 3 of 4 main symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: This report found that the majority of children identified during the 2016 ZIKV outbreak only presented with 2 of the 4 main symptoms. In addition, pediatric ZIKV cases were frequently associated with symptomatic household members.

Performance of the new HIV-1/2 diagnostic algorithm in Florida's public health testing population: a review of the first five months of utilization.

OBJECTIVE: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Association of Public Health Laboratories have proposed a new HIV-1/2 Diagnostic Algorithm: a fourth-generation HIV-1/2 Ag/Ab immunoassay (IA) followed, when repeatedly reactive, by an HIV-1/HIV-2 antibody differentiation test, and if that is non-reactive, HIV-1 nucleic acid amplification testing (NAT). The objective of the study was to evaluate performance of the new algorithm after five months of utilization in our high volume, high HIV-1 seroprevalence public health population. METHODS: Algorithm sensitivity and specificity was evaluated on 51,953 prospective serum or plasma specimens from individuals self-referring for HIV serostatus determination. Specimens were tested on the day of receipt or maintained at 4°C until the next testing opportunity. If the initial HIV-1/2 Ag/Ab IA (Abbott Combo) was nonreactive, a negative lab interpretation report would follow. If the initial IA was reactive, repeat screening in duplicate was immediately performed. Repeatedly reactive specimens were tested with an HIV-1/HIV-2 differentiation assay (Multispot [MS] HIV-1/HIV-2 Rapid Test) on the same or next workday. If the Abbott Combo-MS assays were discordant, HIV-1 NAT (APTIMA(®) HIV-1 RNA) was performed. In addition to the algorithm performance, we also evaluated the laboratory "specimen receipt to reporting" turnaround time (TAT). RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of the new HIV Diagnostic Algorithm with serum and plasma specimens over the initial 5 month period was 100% (922/922) and 99.99% (51,030/51,031), respectively. Two algorithm-defined acute HIV-1 infections (AHI) were detected. In addition only 3 of the 992 MS secondary tests performed were interpreted as HIV-1 Indeterminate (HIV-1 recombinant gp41 reactivity only). Of these, 2 were HIV-1 NAT reactive, defined in-house as an early HIV infection (EHI) and one was HIV-1 NAT nonreactive, indicating a false positive initial screening result. Laboratory TAT for reporting concordant reactive Abbott Combo-MS results in ≤ 2 workdays was 96%, compared to 22% for reporting concordant reactive 3rd generation IA-Western blot results. CONCLUSIONS: In our public health testing population, results from the new HIV Diagnostic Algorithm exceeded those of the 3rd generation IA-WB algorithm with respect to HIV-1 sensitivity. The identification of two algorithm-defined AHIs provided the opportunity to inform these individuals of their HIV status and link them to medical care earlier than the scheduled posttest counseling appointment.