Rapid, sensitive, and specific lateral-flow immunochromatographic point-of-care device for detection of varicella-zoster virus immunoglobulin G antibodies in fingerstick blood.

Varicella zoster virus (VZV) causes childhood chickenpox, becomes latent in sensory ganglia and reactivates years later to cause shingles (Zoster) and postherpetic neuralgia in the elderly and immunosuppressed individuals. Serologic IgG tests can be used to determine if a person has antibodies to VZV from past varicella infection or had received varicella or zoster (shingles) vaccination. Commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) are currently used for the detection of VZV IgG antibodies in patient serum samples. However, ELISA tests require collection and processing of blood samples in a CLIA laboratory to separate serum or plasma for further testing. In this paper, we describe the development and testing of an antibody based Lateral Flow Immunochromatographic assay (LFA) device for the detection of VZV IgG in fingerstick whole blood. Analytical and clinical analyses were performed to compare the performance characteristics of the Viro VZV IgG LFA (VZV LFA) and the Diamedix VZV IgG ELISA. Analytical studies demonstrated the higher sensitivity of the VZV LFA compared to the ELISA by testing dilutions of the WHO VZV IgG serum International Standard. Clinical performance characteristics of the VZV LFA fingerstick whole blood assay were assessed at three point of care (POC) facilities by untrained users testing samples from 300 prospectively enrolled study subjects. VZV LFA results were compared with results obtained by testing serum samples obtained from the same study participants by the Diamedix VZV IgG ELISA. Two specimens with invalid results by the LFA assay were not included in the LFA performance calculations and nine equivocal ELISA results were included as positive for IgG results. The results from all three POC clinical sites demonstrated the higher sensitivity/positive percent agreement (PPA) (99.26%, 95% CI: 97.34-99.80) of the VZV LFA compared to the Diamedix VZV IgG ELISA (94.08%, 95% CI: 90.72-96.27). The specificity/negative percent agreement (NPA) of the VZV LFA compared to the ELISA test was calculated initially to be 39.29% (95% CI: 23.57-57.59) with 19 discordant test results out of 298 test results between the two assays (17 LFA positive/ELISA negative and two LFA negative/ELISA positive). The PPA and true NPA of the VZV LFA were determined by testing all 298 samples, including the discordant (19) and all concordant negative and positive (279) study subject serum samples, before and after blocking VZV gE antibody sites in the samples by spiking with VZV LFA gE capture antigen. The NPA improved to 100% (95% CI: 74.12-100) after the procedure when compared to the ELISA test results. The comparator ELISA PPA based on the spiking/blocking study remained as 94.08%, (95% CI: 90.72-96.27), comparable to test results from untreated samples. The VZV LFA has been demonstrated to be simple and sufficiently robust for use in CLIA-waived POC facilities by untrained healthcare professionals and to detect VZV IgG in 20 min from fingerstick whole blood. The VZV LFA therefore provides a fast, reliable, and highly sensitive method of determining prior VZV viral infection or varicella and zoster vaccination status.

Development of Medical Countermeasures to Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus.

Preclinical development of and research on potential Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) medical countermeasures remain preliminary; advancements are needed before most countermeasures are ready to be tested in human clinical trials. Research priorities include standardization of animal models and virus stocks for studying disease pathogenesis and efficacy of medical countermeasures; development of MERS-CoV diagnostics; improved access to nonhuman primates to support preclinical research; studies to better understand and control MERS-CoV disease, including vaccination studies in camels; and development of a standardized clinical trial protocol. Partnering with clinical trial networks in affected countries to evaluate safety and efficacy of investigational therapeutics will strengthen efforts to identify successful medical countermeasures.

Concerns regarding a new culture method for Borrelia burgdorferi not approved for the diagnosis of Lyme disease.

In 2005, CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning regarding the use of Lyme disease tests whose accuracy and clinical usefulness have not been adequately established. Often these are laboratory-developed tests (also known as "home brew" tests) that are manufactured and used within a single laboratory and have not been cleared or approved by FDA. Recently, CDC has received inquiries regarding a laboratory-developed test that uses a novel culture method to identify Borrelia burgdorferi, the spirochete that causes Lyme disease. Patient specimens reportedly are incubated using a two-step pre-enrichment process, followed by immunostaining with or without polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis. Specimens that test positive by immunostaining or PCR are deemed "culture positive". Published methods and results for this laboratory-developed test have been reviewed by CDC. The review raised serious concerns about false-positive results caused by laboratory contamination and the potential for misdiagnosis.

Comprehensive laboratory evaluation of a specific lateral flow assay for the presumptive identification of abrin in suspicious white powders and environmental samples.

Abrin is a heterodimeric toxin present in the seeds of the Abrus precatorius plant. The easily obtainable seeds can yield a highly toxic product that can be used in various types of biocrimes and terrorism-related activities, including "white-powder" letters. Although the vast majority of these threats are hoaxes, the lack of rapid and reliable detection assays for abrin, such as lateral flow assays (LFAs), can be an impediment to accurate and rapid hazard assessment. One of the complicating factors associated with LFAs is the use of antibodies of poor affinity and specificity that cross-react with near neighbors or that bind to plant lectins, which are capable of nonspecifically cross-linking the capture and detector antibodies. Because of the critical need to promote public safety and public health, we conducted a comprehensive laboratory evaluation of a commercial LFA for the rapid detection of abrin. This study was conducted using comprehensive inclusivity and exclusivity panels of abrin and near-neighbor plant materials, along with panels of lectins, related proteins, white powders, and environmental background material, to determine the sensitivity, specificity, limit of detection, dynamic range, and repeatability of the assay for the specific intended use of evaluating suspicious white powders and environmental samples for the presumptive presence of abrin.

FDA perspectives on diagnostic device clinical studies for respiratory infections.

Two pathways are described for submission to FDA for clearance of a diagnostic device: a Premarket Application (PMA), which can lead to approval of a diagnostic device, and a Premarket Notification, which can lead to clearance. The latter is often called a 510(k), named for the statute providing for this path. Recent FDA clearance of molecular-based multiplex panels represents the beginning of a new era for the diagnosis of respiratory infections. The ability to test for multiple pathogens simultaneously, accompanied by the increasing availability of molecular-based assays for newly recognized respiratory pathogens will likely have a major impact on patient care, drug development, and public health epidemiology. We provide a general overview of how FDA evaluates new diagnostics for respiratory tract infections and the agency's expectations for sponsors developing new tests in this area.

Approval of novel biomarkers: FDA's perspective and major requests.

FDA has been regulating diagnostic tests (including biomarkers) since passage of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976. Although always of interest as diagnostic tools, biomarkers (particularly genetic/genomic) have become of increased interest because of their potential impact on the development and personalized use of drugs. Unfortunately, there seem to be uncertainties among translational researchers as to the specific analytical and clinical measurement criteria needed for the approval of these novel biomarkers. This meeting presentation describes the current FDA perspective and major requirements and data for the validation/approval of an in vitro diagnostic device (IVD) based on a biomarker. The approval process for an IVD based on a biomarker used in the identification of a disease or condition (diagnosing, screening, monitoring) is well established, and is essentially identical to the process to generate sufficient analytical and clinical data for the approval of regular diagnostic devices. On the contrary, approvals for IVDs based on biomarker which may be designed to evaluate the efficacy or answer safety questions for new drug entities are less streamlined. The clinical studies are more complex, resulting in higher ethical standards, increased costs and requiring complex statistical evaluation. There is a small but growing literature on new models for co-development of drugs and diagnostics which will be discussed. Regulators like the FDA develop and bring a flexible regulatory toolbox to the table and are committed to assuring that scientific and regulatory thresholds are tempered to assure rapid access to new technologies while protecting public health.