ELIMINATE: a PCR record-based macroelimination project for systematic recall of HCV-RNA-positive persons in Austria.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Micro-elimination projects targeted to specific hepatitis C virus (HCV) risk populations have been successful. Systematic identification of persons with HCV viremia, regardless of risk group, based on already available laboratory records may represent an effective macroelimination approach to achieve global HCV elimination. METHODS: Persons with a last positive HCV-RNA PCR result between 2008-2020 in the reference virology laboratories in eastern Austria were identified. First, (i) we described their demographic characteristics, (ii) we systematically recalled persons to the respective centers and (iii) started antiviral treatment if HCV-RNA viremia was confirmed, and (iv) recorded sustained virologic response (SVR). This interim report includes the preliminary results from 8 participating centers. RESULTS: During the study period 22,682 persons underwent HCV-RNA PCR testing, 11,216 (49.4%) were positive at any point in time, and 6006 (26.5%) showed detectable HCV-RNA at the last PCR test, suggesting ongoing HCV viremia. At the time of this interim report, 2546/6006 HCV-RNA PCR(+) persons were evaluated: 443/2546 (17.4%) had died, 852/2546 (33.5%) had invalid contact data, and 547/2546 (21.5%) had achieved SVR between data retrieval and recall. Contact could be established in 236/704 (33.5%) of the remaining target population with 97/236 (41.1%) presenting at the clinic for treatment evaluation. Ultimately, 71/236 (30.1%) started antiviral treatment and SVR was documented in 47/71 (66.2%). CONCLUSION: This ELIMINATE project based on systematic assessment of HCV-RNA PCR-records, identified 6006 persons with potential persisting HCV viremia. Invalid contact data and missed visits for treatment evaluation were the main barriers towards HCV elimination within this project. Importantly, many subjects with HCV viremia lost to follow-up were successfully linked to care and started antiviral treatment.

SARS-CoV-2 Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis with Sotrovimab and Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab in Immunocompromised Patients-A Single-Center Experience.

Immunocompromised patients experience reduced vaccine effectiveness and are at higher risk for coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) death. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) aims to protect these patients. So far, only tixagevimab/cilgavimab is authorized for use as PrEP. This paper aims to provide real-world data on the use of tixagevimab/cilgavimab and sotrovimab as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) PrEP in immunocompromised patients, comparing the evolution of antibody levels and reporting the incidence of breakthrough infections. A retrospective, single-center analysis was conducted including 132 immunocompromised patients with inadequate vaccine response, who received COVID-PrEP at our clinic between January and June 2022. Initially, 95 patients received sotrovimab while 37 patients received tixagevimab/cilgavimab. Antibody levels after first PrEP with sotrovimab remain high for several months after infusion (median 10,058 and 7235 BAU/mL after 1 and 3 months, respectively), with higher titers than after tixagevimab/cilgavimab injection even 3 months later (7235 vs. 1647 BAU/mL, p = 0.0007). Overall, breakthrough infections were rare (13/132, 10%) when compared to overall infection rates during this period (over 30% of the Austrian population), with mild disease course and rapid viral clearance (median 10 days). Sotrovimab may be an additional option for SARS-CoV-2 PrEP.

Evaluation of Five Commercial SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Tests in a Clinical Setting.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care antigen tests (AgTs) for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) enable the rapid testing of infected individuals and are easy-to-use. However, there are few studies evaluating their clinical use. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical performance characteristics of various commercial SARS-CoV-2 AgTs. DESIGN: The sensitivity of five AgTs, comprising four rapid antigen tests (RAT; AMP Rapid Test SARS-CoV-2 Ag, NADAL COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Test, CLINITEST Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test, and Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test) and one sandwich chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA; LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 Assay), were evaluated in 300 nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs. Reverse transcriptase (RT) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was used as a reference method. PARTICIPANTS: NP swabs were collected from patients admitted to hospital due to COVID-19. KEY RESULTS: Sensitivities of the AgTs ranged from 64.9 to 91.7% for samples with RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values lower than 30 and were 100% for cycle threshold (Ct) values lower than 20. The highest sensitivity was observed for CLINITEST Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test, and Roche SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test. Multivariate analysis using time from symptom onset and the Ct value for AgT sensitivity showed an inverse correlation. Further, the female sex was an independent factor of lower RAT sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: Antigen tests from NP swab samples show high sensitivity in patients with a Ct value < 20. The best clinical sensitivity can be obtained using AgTs within the first 6 days after symptom onset.

COVID-19 serology in nephrology healthcare workers.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease patients show a high mortality in cases of a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV­2) infection. Thus, information on the sero-status of nephrology personnel might be crucial for patient protection; however, limited information exists about the presence of SARS-CoV­2 antibodies in asymptomatic individuals. METHODS: We examined the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV­2 IgG and IgM antibodies among healthcare workers of a tertiary care kidney center during the the first peak phase of the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis in Austria using an orthogonal test strategy and a total of 12 commercial nucleocapsid protein or spike glycoprotein-based assays as well as Western blotting and a neutralization assay. RESULTS: At baseline 60 of 235 study participants (25.5%, 95% confidence interval, CI 20.4-31.5%) were judged to be borderline positive or positive for IgM or IgG using a high sensitivity/low specificity threshold in one test system. Follow-up analysis after about 2 weeks revealed IgG positivity in 12 (5.1%, 95% CI: 2.9-8.8%) and IgM positivity in 6 (2.6%, 95% CI: 1.1-5.6) in at least one assay. Of the healthcare workers 2.1% (95% CI: 0.8-5.0%) showed IgG nucleocapsid antibodies in at least 2 assays. By contrast, positive controls with proven COVID-19 showed antibody positivity among almost all test systems. Moreover, serum samples obtained from healthcare workers did not show SARS-CoV­2 neutralizing capacity, in contrast to positive controls. CONCLUSION: Using a broad spectrum of antibody tests the present study revealed inconsistent results for SARS-CoV­2 seroprevalence among asymptomatic individuals, while this was not the case among COVID-19 patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CONEC, ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT04347694.

CLSI-Based Validation of Manufacturer-Derived Reference Intervals on the Cobas 8000 Platform.

BACKGROUND: Reference intervals provided by diagnostic test manufacturers should be transferred to clinical laboratories after validation. Although protocols exist, laboratories rarely perform and report on results of validation studies. METHODS: We validated reference intervals (RIs) of 87 analytes on a Cobas 8000 platform according to standards published by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). RESULTS: For 8 analytes, decision limits were provided in the package inserts. Among the 79 RIs subjected to transference validation, 8 were found not valid for transference, including lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) among women, and the following among both sexes: potassium, homocysteine, immunoglobulin E (IgE), free lambda light chain (FLC λ), C3 complement (C3c), folate, and 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25[(OH]D). For LDH, potassium, homocysteine, C3c, folate, and 25(OH)D, RIs or thresholds suitable for transference were available in the literature; however, this was not the case for IgE and FLC λ. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrates that validation of RIs provided in the manufacturer provided package inserts is indispensable.