Reconsideration of blood donation testing strategy for human T-cell lymphotropic virus in Australia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Universal testing of blood donations for human T-cell lymphotropic virus (HTLV) in Australia may no longer be appropriate given the low prevalence of HTLV infection and the mitigating effect of universal leucodepletion for cellular components. This study aimed to determine the most appropriate HTLV testing strategy using the Risk-Based Decision-Making Framework for Blood Safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The risk of HTLV transfusion-transmission using three testing strategies (universal, new-donor and no testing) and cost-effectiveness of the first two strategies were assessed using adaptations of published mathematical models. RESULTS: The overall prevalence for 2004-2014 was three HTLV-positives per million donations. It was estimated that annually, universal testing incurred a cost of approximately AUD $3 million and prevented 83 HTLV-positive cellular components from being issued, and new-donor testing cost approximately $225 000 and prevented 81 components. The number of cases of transfusion-transmitted HTLV and HTLV-associated disease prevented per year by universal and new-donor testing was essentially equivalent. According to preset risk thresholds, the risk of transfusion-transmission was negligible for universal and new-donor testing, and minimal without testing. CONCLUSION: Transfusion-transmission of HTLV is a minimal risk in Australia even without testing. However, any revision of testing strategy must consider not only risk and cost-effectiveness, but also stakeholder, ethical and regulatory perspectives. Considering all relevant criteria, new-donor testing is judged the optimal strategy because it is able to achieve almost the same outcomes as universal testing, at a fraction of the cost.

Hepatitis E virus RNA in Australian blood donors: prevalence and risk assessment.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a known transfusion-transmissible agent. HEV infection has increased in prevalence in many developed nations with RNA detection in donors as high as 1 in 600. A high proportion of HEV infections are asymptomatic and therefore not interdicted by donor exclusion criteria. To manage the HEV transfusion-transmission (TT) risk some developed nations have implemented HEV RNA screening. In Australia, HEV is rarely notified; although locally acquired infections have been reported, and the burden of disease is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of HEV infection in Australian donors and associated TT risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Plasma samples (n = 74 131) were collected from whole blood donors during 2016 and screened for HEV RNA by transcription-mediated amplification (TMA) in pools of six. Individual TMA reactive samples were confirmed by RT-PCR and, if positive, viral load determined. Prevalence data from the study were used to model the HEV-TT risk. RESULTS: One sample in 74 131 (95% CI: 1 in 1 481 781 to 1 in 15 031) was confirmed positive for HEV RNA, with an estimated viral load of 180 IU/ml, which is below that typically associated with TT. Using a transmission-risk model, we estimated the risk of an adverse outcome associated with TT-HEV of approximately 1 in 3·5 million components transfused. CONCLUSION: Hepatitis E virus viremia is rare in Australia and lower than the published RNA prevalence estimates of other developed countries. The risk of TT-HEV adverse outcomes is negligible, and HEV RNA donor screening is not currently indicated.