Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 83
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Nature ; 596(7870): 114-118, 2021 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34262174

RESUMEN

Pathogenic fungi reside in the intestinal microbiota but rarely cause disease. Little is known about the interactions between fungi and the immune system that promote commensalism. Here we investigate the role of adaptive immunity in promoting mutual interactions between fungi and host. We find that potentially pathogenic Candida species induce and are targeted by intestinal immunoglobulin A (IgA) responses. Focused studies on Candida albicans reveal that the pathogenic hyphal morphotype, which is specialized for adhesion and invasion, is preferentially targeted and suppressed by intestinal IgA responses. IgA from mice and humans directly targets hyphal-enriched cell-surface adhesins. Although typically required for pathogenesis, C. albicans hyphae are less fit for gut colonization1,2 and we show that immune selection against hyphae improves the competitive fitness of C. albicans. C. albicans exacerbates intestinal colitis3 and we demonstrate that hyphae and an IgA-targeted adhesin exacerbate intestinal damage. Finally, using a clinically relevant vaccine to induce an adhesin-specific immune response protects mice from C. albicans-associated damage during colitis. Together, our findings show that adaptive immunity suppresses harmful fungal effectors, with benefits to both C. albicans and its host. Thus, IgA uniquely uncouples colonization from pathogenesis in commensal fungi to promote homeostasis.


Asunto(s)
Inmunidad Adaptativa , Candida albicans/inmunología , Candida albicans/fisiología , Interacciones Huésped-Patógeno/inmunología , Simbiosis/inmunología , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Animales , Antígenos Fúngicos/inmunología , Candida albicans/patogenicidad , Colitis/inmunología , Colitis/microbiología , Colitis/patología , Femenino , Vacunas Fúngicas/inmunología , Microbioma Gastrointestinal/inmunología , Humanos , Hifa/inmunología , Inmunoglobulina A/inmunología , Masculino , Ratones , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto Joven
2.
Clin Infect Dis ; 78(7): e385-e415, 2024 Jun 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38112284

RESUMEN

Accurate molecular diagnostic tests are necessary for confirming a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and for identifying asymptomatic carriage of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The number of available SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection tests continues to increase as does the COVID-19 diagnostic literature. Thus, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) developed an evidence-based diagnostic guideline to assist clinicians, clinical laboratorians, patients, and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests. In addition, we provide a conceptual framework for understanding molecular diagnostic test performance, discuss nuances of test result interpretation in a variety of practice settings, and highlight important unmet research needs related to COVID-19 diagnostic testing. IDSA convened a multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists, and experts in systematic literature review to identify and prioritize clinical questions and outcomes related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostics. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. The panel agreed on 12 diagnostic recommendations. Access to accurate SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing is critical for patient care, hospital infection prevention, and the public health response to COVID-19 infection. Information on the clinical performance of available tests continues to grow, but the quality of evidence of the current literature to support this updated molecular diagnostic guideline remains moderate to very low. Recognizing these limitations, the IDSA panel weighed available diagnostic evidence and recommends nucleic acid testing for all symptomatic individuals suspected of having COVID-19. In addition, testing is suggested for asymptomatic individuals with known or suspected contact with a COVID-19 case when the results will impact isolation/quarantine/personal protective equipment (PPE) usage decisions. Evidence in support of rapid testing and testing of upper respiratory specimens other than nasopharyngeal swabs, which offer logistical advantages, is sufficient to warrant conditional recommendations in favor of these approaches.


Asunto(s)
Prueba de Ácido Nucleico para COVID-19 , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/diagnóstico , SARS-CoV-2/genética , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Prueba de Ácido Nucleico para COVID-19/normas , Prueba de Ácido Nucleico para COVID-19/métodos , Estados Unidos , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular/normas , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular/métodos , Prueba de COVID-19/métodos , Prueba de COVID-19/normas , Técnicas de Amplificación de Ácido Nucleico/normas , Técnicas de Amplificación de Ácido Nucleico/métodos
3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2024 Mar 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38489670

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The role of serologic testing for SARS-CoV-2 has evolved during the pandemic as seroprevalence in global populations has increased. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) convened an expert panel to perform a systematic review of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) serology literature and construct updated best practice guidance related to SARS-CoV-2 serologic testing. This guideline is an update to the fourth in a series of rapid, frequently updated COVID-19 guidelines developed by IDSA. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations and identify unmet research needs pertaining to the use of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests for diagnosis, decisions related to vaccination and administration of monoclonal antibodies or convalescent plasma in immunocompromised patients, and identification of a serologic correlate of immunity. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists and experts in systematic literature reviewed, identified, and prioritized clinical questions related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 serologic tests. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. RESULTS: The panel recommends against serologic testing to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first two weeks after symptom onset (strong recommendations, low certainty of evidence). Serologic testing should not be used to provide evidence of COVID-19 in symptomatic patients with a high clinical suspicion and repeatedly negative nucleic acid amplification test results (strong recommendation, very low certainty of evidence). Serologic testing may assist with the diagnosis of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (strong recommendation, very low certainty of evidence). To seek evidence for prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, the panel suggests testing for IgG, IgG/IgM, or total antibodies to nucleocapsid protein three to five weeks after symptom onset (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence). In individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination, we suggest against routine serologic testing given no demonstrated benefit to improving patient outcomes (conditional recommendation, very low certainty of evidence.) The panel acknowledges further that a negative spike antibody test may be a useful metric to identify immunocompromised patients who are candidates for immune therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The high seroprevalence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 worldwide limits the utility of detecting anti-SARS CoV-2 antibody. The certainty of available evidence supporting the use of serology for diagnosis was graded as very low to low. Future studies should use serologic assays calibrated to a common reference standard.

4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 76(9): 1550-1558, 2023 05 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36533704

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: We assessed how laboratories use and handle reporting of results of rapid diagnostics performed on positive blood culture broths, with a focus on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) markers. METHODS: A survey assembled by the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group Diagnostics Committee was circulated from December 2020 to May 2021. The survey was sent to local hospitals, shared on the ClinMicroNet and Division C listservs, and included in a College of American Pathologists proficiency testing survey. RESULTS: Ninety-six laboratories of various sizes across the United States (95%) and outside of the United States (5%) participated. Of the laboratories that had at least 1 rapid diagnostic in place (94%), significant heterogeneity in methods used and reporting practices was found across community (52%) and academic (40%) laboratories serving hospitals of various sizes. Respondents had implemented 1 to 6 different panels/platforms for a total of 31 permutations. Methods of reporting rapid organism identification and AMR results varied from listing all targets as "detected"/"not detected" (16-22%) without interpretive guidance, to interpreting results (23-42%), or providing therapeutic guidance comments to patient-facing healthcare teams (3-17%). CONCLUSIONS: Current approaches to reporting molecular AMR test results from positive blood culture vary significantly across clinical laboratories. Providing interpretative comments with therapeutic guidance alongside results reported may assist clinicians who are not well-versed in genetic mechanisms of AMR. However, this is currently not being done in all clinical laboratories. Standardized strategies for AMR gene result reporting are needed.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Farmacorresistencia Bacteriana , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Antibacterianos/farmacología , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Liderazgo , Cultivo de Sangre , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 77(Suppl 4): S314-S320, 2023 10 16.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37843119

RESUMEN

The advancement of infectious disease diagnostics, along with studies devoted to infections caused by gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria, is a top scientific priority of the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG). Diagnostic tests for infectious diseases are rapidly evolving and improving. However, the availability of rapid tests designed to determine antibacterial resistance or susceptibility directly in clinical specimens remains limited, especially for gram-negative organisms. Additionally, the clinical impact of many new tests, including an understanding of how best to use them to inform optimal antibiotic prescribing, remains to be defined. This review summarizes the recent work of the ARLG toward addressing these unmet needs in the diagnostics field and describes future directions for clinical research aimed at curbing the threat of antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Bacterias Gramnegativas , Liderazgo , Humanos , Antibacterianos/farmacología , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Bacterias Grampositivas , Farmacorresistencia Bacteriana , Bacterias Gramnegativas , Pruebas de Sensibilidad Microbiana , Infecciones por Bacterias Gramnegativas/tratamiento farmacológico
6.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2023 Jan 26.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36702617

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Immunoassays designed to detect SARS-CoV-2 protein antigens (Ag) are commonly used to diagnose COVID-19. The most widely used tests are lateral flow assays that generate results in approximately 15 minutes for diagnosis at the point-of-care. Higher throughput, laboratory-based SARS-CoV-2 Ag assays have also been developed. The number of commercially available SARS-CoV-2 Ag detection tests has increased rapidly, as has the COVID-19 diagnostic literature. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) convened an expert panel to perform a systematic review of the literature and develop best practice guidance related to SARS-CoV-2 Ag testing. This guideline is an update to the third in a series of frequently updated COVID-19 diagnostic guidelines developed by the IDSA. OBJECTIVE: The IDSA's goal was to develop evidence-based recommendations or suggestions that assist clinicians, clinical laboratories, patients, public health authorities, administrators and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 Ag tests in both medical and non-medical settings. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists and experts in systematic literature review identified and prioritized clinical questions related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 Ag tests. A review of relevant, peer-reviewed published literature was conducted through April 1, 2022. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. RESULTS: The panel made ten diagnostic recommendations. These recommendations address Ag testing in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals and assess single versus repeat testing strategies. CONCLUSIONS: U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) SARS-CoV-2 Ag tests with Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) have high specificity and low to moderate sensitivity compared to nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT). Ag test sensitivity is dependent on the presence or absence of symptoms, and in symptomatic patients, on timing of testing after symptom onset. In contrast, Ag tests have high specificity, and, in most cases, positive Ag results can be acted upon without confirmation. Results of point-of-care testing are comparable to those of laboratory-based testing, and observed or unobserved self-collection of specimens for testing yields similar results. Modeling suggests that repeat Ag testing increases sensitivity compared to testing once, but no empirical data were available to inform this question. Based on these observations, rapid RT-PCR or laboratory-based NAAT remains the testing method of choice for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, when timely molecular testing is not readily available or is logistically infeasible, Ag testing helps identify individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were insufficient to make a recommendation about the utility of Ag testing to guide release of patients with COVID-19 from isolation. The overall quality of available evidence supporting use of Ag testing was graded as very low to moderate.

7.
J Clin Microbiol ; 61(12): e0082923, 2023 12 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38092673

RESUMEN

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) resistance testing by targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) allows for the simultaneous analysis of multiple genes. We developed and validated an amplicon-based Ion Torrent NGS assay to detect CMV resistance mutations in UL27, UL54, UL56, and UL97 and compared the results to standard Sanger sequencing. NGS primers were designed to generate 83 overlapping amplicons of four CMV genes (~10 kb encompassing 138 mutation sites). An open-access software plugin was developed to perform read alignment, call variants, and interpret drug resistance. Plasmids were tested to determine NGS error rate and minor variant limit of detection. NGS limit of detection was determined using the CMV WHO International Standard and quantified clinical specimens. Reproducibility was also assessed. After establishing quality control metrics, 185 patient specimens previously tested using Sanger were reanalyzed by NGS. The NGS assay had a low error rate (<0.05%) and high accuracy (95%) for detecting CMV-associated resistance mutations present at ≥5% in contrived mixed populations. Mutation sites were reproducibly sequenced with 40× coverage when plasma viral loads were ≥2.6 log IU/mL. NGS detected the same resistance-associated mutations identified by Sanger in 68/69 (98.6%) specimens. In 16 specimens, NGS detected 18 resistance mutations that Sanger failed to detect; 14 were low-frequency variants (<20%), and six would have changed the drug resistance interpretation. The NGS assay showed excellent agreement with Sanger and generated high-quality sequence from low viral load specimens. Additionally, the higher resolution and analytic sensitivity of NGS potentially enables earlier detection of antiviral resistance.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Citomegalovirus , Citomegalovirus , Humanos , Citomegalovirus/genética , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Mutación , Infecciones por Citomegalovirus/diagnóstico , Secuenciación de Nucleótidos de Alto Rendimiento/métodos , Farmacorresistencia Viral/genética
8.
Curr Opin Infect Dis ; 36(4): 228-234, 2023 08 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37431553

RESUMEN

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Nucleic acid sequence-based organism identification plays an important role in the diagnosis and management of transplant and cancer-associated infectious diseases. Here, we provide a high-level overview of advanced sequencing technologies, discuss test performance, and highlight unmet research needs with a focus on immunocompromised hosts. RECENT FINDINGS: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies are powerful tools with a growing role in managing immunocompromised patients with suspected infection. Targeted NGS (tNGS) can identify pathogens directly from patient specimens, especially for mixed samples, and has been used to detect resistance mutations in transplant-related viruses (e.g. CMV). Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is increasingly used for outbreak investigations and infection control. Metagenomic NGS (mNGS) is useful for hypothesis-free testing and can simultaneously assess pathogens and host response to infection. SUMMARY: NGS testing increases diagnostic yield relative to standard culture and Sanger sequencing but may be limited by high cost, turnaround times, and detection of unexpected organisms or commensals of uncertain significance. Close collaboration with the clinical microbiology laboratory and infectious diseases is recommended when NGS testing is considered. Additional research is required to understand which immunocompromised patients are most likely to benefit from NGS testing, and when testing should ideally be performed.


Asunto(s)
Servicios de Laboratorio Clínico , Enfermedades Transmisibles , Virosis , Humanos , Medicina de Precisión , Virosis/diagnóstico , Secuenciación de Nucleótidos de Alto Rendimiento
9.
Transpl Infect Dis ; 25(2): e14020, 2023 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36705292

RESUMEN

Solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) remain at high risk for infection throughout their post-transplant course. Dosing of immunosuppressive medications, strategies that prevent infection, and choice of empiric antimicrobial treatment could be optimized by a better understanding of an individual patient's risk for infectious complications. Diagnostic tests that qualitatively or quantitatively measure the function of the immune system and/or its response to infection may be useful for individualized management decisions. Numerous studies have identified an association between infectious outcomes after solid organ transplantation (SOT) and the results of a variety of non-pathogen-specific or "pathogen-agnostic" immune monitoring tests. These biomarkers include humoral immune markers, functional or quantitative assessments of cellular immunity, transcriptomic-based diagnostics, and replication of viruses within the human virome, which have been used to predict or diagnose a variety of different infectious diseases complicating SOT. In this narrative review, we discuss several host-derived immune biomarkers that show promise for either predicting or diagnosing infection among SOTRs. However, additional studies are needed to determine the optimal use of immune response testing. Whether immune biomarkers contribute added benefits to current standard clinical care has not yet been determined. Testing must be validated across a range of clinical scenarios, including surveillance to predict infection risk and diagnosis of active infection at various time points post transplant.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones , Trasplante de Órganos , Humanos , Trasplante de Órganos/efectos adversos , Trasplante de Órganos/métodos , Infecciones/etiología , Receptores de Trasplantes , Biomarcadores
10.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(7): 1210-1216, 2022 09 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35100619

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) infection and BK polyomavirus nephropathy (BKPyVAN) are important causes of allograft dysfunction and premature allograft loss in renal transplant recipients. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Controlled clinical trials to evaluate new agents for prevention and treatment are needed but are hampered by the lack of outcome measures that accurately assess the effect of the intervention, are clinically relevant, and are acceptable from a regulatory perspective. METHODS: To facilitate consistent end points in clinical trials and to support clinical research and drug development, definitions of BKPyV infection and disease have been developed by the BK Disease Definitions Working Group of the Transplantation Associated Virus Infection Forum with the Forum for Collaborative Research, which consists of scientists, clinicians, regulators, and industry representatives. CONCLUSIONS: These definitions refine established principles of "proven" BKPyV disease and introduce a "probable" disease category that could be used in clinical trials to prevent or treat BKPyVAN in renal transplant recipients.


Asunto(s)
Virus BK , Enfermedades Renales , Trasplante de Riñón , Infecciones por Polyomavirus , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Consenso , Humanos , Trasplante de Riñón/efectos adversos , Infecciones por Polyomavirus/diagnóstico , Infecciones por Polyomavirus/etiología , Receptores de Trasplantes
11.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(8): 1496-1502, 2022 04 28.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34731234

RESUMEN

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged into a world of maturing pathogen genomics, with >2 million genomes sequenced at this writing. The rise of more transmissible variants of concern that affect vaccine and therapeutic effectiveness has led to widespread interest in SARS-CoV-2 evolution. Clinicians are also eager to take advantage of the information provided by SARS-CoV-2 genotyping beyond surveillance purposes. Here, we review the potential role of SARS-CoV-2 genotyping in clinical care. The review covers clinical use cases for SARS-CoV-2 genotyping, methods of SARS-CoV-2 genotyping, assay validation and regulatory requirements, clinical reporting for laboratories, and emerging issues in clinical SARS-CoV-2 sequencing. While clinical uses of SARS-CoV-2 genotyping are currently limited, rapid technological change along with a growing ability to interpret variants in real time foretell a growing role for SARS-CoV-2 genotyping in clinical care as continuing data emerge on vaccine and therapeutic efficacy.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Enfermedades Transmisibles , COVID-19/prevención & control , Consenso , Genotipo , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2/genética
12.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(7): 1284-1292, 2022 04 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34463708

RESUMEN

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are among the most common bacterial infections in the United States and are a major driver of antibiotic use, both appropriate and inappropriate, across healthcare settings. Novel UTI diagnostics are a strategy that might enable better UTI treatment. Members of the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group Laboratory Center and the Infectious Diseases Society of America Diagnostics Committee convened to envision ideal future UTI diagnostics, with a view towards improving delivery of healthcare, patient outcomes and experiences, and antibiotic use, addressing which types of UTI diagnostics are needed and how companies might approach development of novel UTI diagnostics.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones Urinarias , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Farmacorresistencia Bacteriana , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Infecciones Urinarias/diagnóstico , Infecciones Urinarias/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Urinarias/microbiología
13.
J Clin Microbiol ; 60(12): e0133622, 2022 12 21.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36445152

RESUMEN

While the practice of viral culture has largely been replaced by nucleic acid amplification tests, circumstances still exist in which the availability of viral culture will allow for the diagnosis of infections not included in a provider's differential diagnosis. Here, we examine the cytopathic effects (CPE) and clinical data associated with 18 cases of monkeypox virus (MPXV) isolated from 19 clinical samples submitted for viral culture. During the study period, a total of 3,468 viral cultures were performed with herpes simplex virus (HSV) most commonly isolated (646/3,468; 18.6%), followed by MPXV (19/3,468; 0.6%) and varicella-zoster virus (VZV) (12/3,468; 0.4%). Most MPXV-positive samples were obtained from males (14/19) and taken from genital (7/19) or rectal lesions (5/19). Cycle threshold values of tested samples ranged from 15.3 to 29.0. Growth of MPXV in cell culture was rapid, yielding detectable CPE at a median of 2 days (range: 1 to 4) often with >50% of the monolayer affected in RMK, BGM, A549, and MRC-5 cell lines. As clinical features of MPXV, HSV, and VZV lesions may overlap, CPE patterns were compared between viruses. HSV CPE developed in a similar time frame (median: 2 days, range: 1 to 7) but was more often negative in RMK cells relative to MPXV. VZV grew more slowly (median: 9 days, range: 5 to 11) and demonstrated CPE affecting ≤25% of cell monolayers when positive. Viral culture remains an important tool for the detection of rare or emerging viral pathogens, particularly when high viral load specimens are easily obtained.


Asunto(s)
Exantema , Herpes Simple , Virosis , Masculino , Humanos , Monkeypox virus , Herpes Simple/diagnóstico , Simplexvirus , Herpesvirus Humano 3 , Diferenciación Celular
14.
J Clin Microbiol ; 60(1): e0165921, 2022 01 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34731022

RESUMEN

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged into a world of maturing pathogen genomics, with more than 2 million genomes sequenced at the time of writing. The rise of more transmissible variants of concern that impact vaccine and therapeutic effectiveness has led to widespread interest in SARS-CoV-2 evolution. Clinicians are also eager to take advantage of the information provided by SARS-CoV-2 genotyping beyond surveillance purposes. Here, we review the potential role of SARS-CoV-2 genotyping in clinical care. The review covers clinical use cases for SARS-CoV-2 genotyping, methods of SARS-CoV-2 genotyping, assay validation and regulatory requirements, and clinical reporting for laboratories, as well as emerging issues in clinical SARS-CoV-2 sequencing. While clinical uses of SARS-CoV-2 genotyping are currently limited, rapid technological change along with a growing ability to interpret variants in real time foretells a growing role for SARS-CoV-2 genotyping in clinical care as continuing data emerge on vaccine and therapeutic efficacy.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Enfermedades Transmisibles , Consenso , Genotipo , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos
15.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2021 Jan 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33480973

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Accurate molecular diagnostic tests are necessary for confirming a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Direct detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acids in respiratory tract specimens informs patient, healthcare institution and public health level decision-making. The numbers of available SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection tests are rapidly increasing, as is the COVID-19 diagnostic literature. Thus, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) recognized a significant need for frequently updated systematic reviews of the literature to inform evidence-based best practice guidance. OBJECTIVE: The IDSA's goal was to develop an evidence-based diagnostic guideline to assist clinicians, clinical laboratorians, patients and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests. In addition, we provide a conceptual framework for understanding molecular diagnostic test performance, discuss the nuance of test result interpretation in a variety of practice settings and highlight important unmet research needs in the COVID-19 diagnostic testing space. METHODS: IDSA convened a multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists, and experts in systematic literature review to identify and prioritize clinical questions and outcomes related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostics. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 17 diagnostic recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Universal access to accurate SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing is critical for patient care, hospital infection prevention and the public response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Information on the clinical performance of available tests is rapidly emerging, but the quality of evidence of the current literature is considered moderate to very low. Recognizing these limitations, the IDSA panel weighed available diagnostic evidence and recommends nucleic acid testing for all symptomatic individuals suspected of having COVID-19. In addition, testing is recommended for asymptomatic individuals with known or suspected contact with a COVID-19 case. Testing asymptomatic individuals without known exposure is suggested when the results will impact isolation/quarantine/personal protective equipment (PPE) usage decisions, dictate eligibility for surgery, or inform solid organ or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation timing. Ultimately, prioritization of testing will depend on institutional-specific resources and the needs of different patient populations.

16.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2021 Jun 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34160592

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Immunoassays designed to detect SARS-CoV-2 protein antigens are now commercially available. The most widely used tests are rapid lateral flow assays that generate results in approximately 15 minutes for diagnosis at the point-of-care. Higher throughput, laboratory-based SARS-CoV-2 antigen (Ag) assays have also been developed. The overall accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 Ag tests, however, is not well defined. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) convened an expert panel to perform a systematic review of the literature and develop best practice guidance related to SARS-CoV-2 Ag testing. This guideline is the third in a series of rapid, frequently updated COVID-19 diagnostic guidelines developed by IDSA. OBJECTIVE: IDSA's goal was to develop evidence-based recommendations or suggestions that assist clinicians, clinical laboratories, patients, public health authorities, administrators and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 Ag tests in both medical and non-medical settings. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists and experts in systematic literature review identified and prioritized clinical questions related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 Ag tests. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. RESULTS: The panel agreed on five diagnostic recommendations. These recommendations address antigen testing in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals as well as assess single versus repeat testing strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Data on the clinical performance of U.S. Food and Drug Administration SARS-CoV-2 Ag tests with Emergency Use Authorization is mostly limited to single, one-time testing versus standard nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) as the reference standard. Rapid Ag tests have high specificity and low to modest sensitivity compared to reference NAAT methods. Antigen test sensitivity is heavily dependent on viral load, with differences observed between symptomatic compared to asymptomatic individuals and the time of testing post onset of symptoms. Based on these observations, rapid RT-PCR or laboratory-based NAAT remain the diagnostic methods of choice for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, when molecular testing is not readily available or is logistically infeasible, Ag testing can help identify some individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The overall quality of available evidence supporting use of Ag testing was graded as very low to moderate.

17.
J Clin Microbiol ; 59(4)2021 03 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33509809

RESUMEN

We compared the performance of the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 antigen card to that of a standard reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) assay (Thermo Fisher TaqPath COVID-19 Combo kit) for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 2,645 asymptomatic students presenting for screening at the University of Utah. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 1.7% of the study participants by RT-PCR. BinaxNOW identified 24 infections but missed 21 infections that were detected by RT-PCR. The analytical sensitivity (positive agreement) and analytical specificity (negative agreement) for the BinaxNOW were 53.3% and 100%, respectively, compared to the RT-PCR assay. The median cycle threshold (CT ) value in the specimens that had concordant positive BinaxNOW antigen results was significantly lower than that of specimens that were discordant (CT of 17.6 versus 29.6; P < 0.001). In individuals with presumably high viral loads (CT of <23.0), a 95.8% positive agreement was observed between the RT-PCR assay and BinaxNOW. Due to the possibility of false-negative results, caution must be taken when utilizing rapid antigen testing for screening asymptomatic individuals.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Antígenos Virales , Humanos , ARN Viral/genética , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Universidades
18.
J Clin Microbiol ; 59(7): e0178420, 2021 06 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33504591

RESUMEN

Fungal infections are a rising threat to our immunocompromised patient population, as well as other nonimmunocompromised patients with various medical conditions. However, little progress has been made in the past decade to improve fungal diagnostics. To jointly address this diagnostic challenge, the Fungal Diagnostics Laboratory Consortium (FDLC) was recently created. The FDLC consists of 26 laboratories from the United States and Canada that routinely provide fungal diagnostic services for patient care. A survey of fungal diagnostic capacity among the 26 members of the FDLC was recently completed, identifying the following diagnostic gaps: lack of molecular detection of mucormycosis; lack of an optimal diagnostic algorithm incorporating fungal biomarkers and molecular tools for early and accurate diagnosis of Pneumocystis pneumonia, aspergillosis, candidemia, and endemic mycoses; lack of a standardized molecular approach to identify fungal pathogens directly in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues; lack of robust databases to enhance mold identification with matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry; suboptimal diagnostic approaches for mold blood cultures, tissue culture processing for Mucorales, and fungal respiratory cultures for cystic fibrosis patients; inadequate capacity for fungal point-of-care testing to detect and identify new, emerging or underrecognized, rare, or uncommon fungal pathogens; and performance of antifungal susceptibility testing. In this commentary, the FDLC delineates the most pressing unmet diagnostic needs and provides expert opinion on how to fulfill them. Most importantly, the FDLC provides a robust laboratory network to tackle these diagnostic gaps and ultimately to improve and enhance the clinical laboratory's capability to rapidly and accurately diagnose fungal infections.


Asunto(s)
Laboratorios , Mucorales , Canadá , Técnicas de Laboratorio Clínico , Testimonio de Experto , Humanos
19.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2020 Sep 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32918466

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The availability of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) serologic testing has rapidly increased. Current assays use a variety of technologies, measure different classes of immunoglobulin or immunoglobulin combinations and detect antibodies directed against different portions of the virus. The overall accuracy of these tests, however, has not been well-defined. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) convened an expert panel to perform a systematic review of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) serology literature and construct best practice guidance related to SARS-CoV-2 serologic testing. This guideline is the fourth in a series of rapid, frequently updated COVID-19 guidelines developed by IDSA. OBJECTIVE: IDSA's goal was to develop evidence-based recommendations that assist clinicians, clinical laboratories, patients and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 serologic tests in a variety of settings. We also highlight important unmet research needs pertaining to the use of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests for diagnosis, public health surveillance, vaccine development and the selection of convalescent plasma donors. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists and experts in systematic literature review identified and prioritized clinical questions related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 serologic tests. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. RESULTS: The panel agreed on eight diagnostic recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Information on the clinical performance and utility of SARS-CoV-2 serologic tests are rapidly emerging. Based on available evidence, detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies may be useful for confirming the presence of current or past infection in selected situations. The panel identified three potential indications for serologic testing including: 1) evaluation of patients with a high clinical suspicion for COVID-19 when molecular diagnostic testing is negative and at least two weeks have passed since symptom onset; 2) assessment of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children; and 3) for conducting serosurveillance studies. The certainty of available evidence supporting the use of serology for either diagnosis or epidemiology was, however, graded as very low to moderate.

20.
Clin Infect Dis ; 71(10): 2744-2751, 2020 12 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32369578

RESUMEN

The clinical signs and symptoms of acute respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are not pathogen specific. Highly sensitive and specific nucleic acid amplification tests have become the diagnostic reference standard for viruses, and translation of bacterial assays from basic research to routine clinical practice represents an exciting advance in respiratory medicine. Most recently, molecular diagnostics have played an essential role in the global health response to the novel coronavirus pandemic. How best to use newer molecular tests for RTI in combination with clinical judgment and traditional methods can be bewildering given the plethora of available assays and rapidly evolving technologies. Here, we summarize the current state of the art with respect to the diagnosis of viral and bacterial RTIs, provide a practical framework for diagnostic decision making using selected patient-centered vignettes, and make recommendations for future studies to advance the field.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio , Virus , Humanos , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/diagnóstico , SARS-CoV-2 , Virus/genética
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA