Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 9 de 9
Filtrar
1.
Dis Markers ; 2021: 8810196, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33532006

RESUMO

Several tests based on chemiluminescence immunoassay techniques have become available to test for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. There is currently insufficient data on serology assay performance beyond 35 days after symptoms onset. We aimed to evaluate SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests on three widely used platforms. A chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA; Abbott Diagnostics, USA), a luminescence immunoassay (LIA; Diasorin, Italy), and an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA; Roche Diagnostics, Switzerland) were investigated. In a multigroup study, sensitivity was assessed in a group of participants with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 (n = 145), whereas specificity was determined in two groups of participants without evidence of COVID-19 (i.e., healthy blood donors, n = 191, and healthcare workers, n = 1002). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, multilevel likelihood ratios (LR), and positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values were characterized. Finally, analytical specificity was characterized in samples with evidence of the Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) (n = 9), cytomegalovirus (CMV) (n = 7), and endemic common-cold coronavirus infections (n = 12) taken prior to the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The diagnostic accuracy was comparable in all three assays (AUC 0.98). Using the manufacturers' cut-offs, the sensitivities were 90%, 95% confidence interval [84,94] (LIA), 93% [88,96] (CMIA), and 96% [91,98] (ECLIA). The specificities were 99.5% [98.9,99.8] (CMIA), 99.7% [99.3,99.9] (LIA), and 99.9% [99.5,99.98] (ECLIA). The LR at half of the manufacturers' cut-offs were 60 (CMIA), 82 (LIA), and 575 (ECLIA) for positive and 0.043 (CMIA) and 0.035 (LIA, ECLIA) for negative results. ECLIA had higher PPV at low pretest probabilities than CMIA and LIA. No interference with EBV or CMV infection was observed, whereas endemic coronavirus in some cases provided signals in LIA and/or CMIA. Although the diagnostic accuracy of the three investigated assays is comparable, their performance in low-prevalence settings is different. Introducing gray zones at half of the manufacturers' cut-offs is suggested, especially for orthogonal testing approaches that use a second assay for confirmation.


Assuntos
Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Medições Luminescentes/métodos , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Adulto , Teste para COVID-19 , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
2.
Swiss Med Wkly ; 150: w20393, 2020 Dec 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33382076

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: In Switzerland, universal health insurance does not cover any routine testing for sexually transmitted infections (STIs), not even in individuals at high risk, and extra-genital swabbing is not standard of care. We compared STI prevalence in a multicentre prospective observational cohort of multi-partner women with/without sex work and evaluated associated risk factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2016 and June 2017, we offered free STI testing to women with multiple  sexual partners (three or more in the previous 12 months), with follow-up examinations every 6 months. We used multiplex polymerase chain-reaction testing (for Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis, Trichomonas vaginalis, Mycoplasma genitalium) for pooled swabs (pharynx, urethra/vagina, anus), and antibody tests for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and Treponema pallidum at every visit, and for hepatitis B and C at baseline. RESULTS: We screened 490 female sex workers (FSWs), including 17 trans women, and 92 other multi-partner women. More than half reported a steady partner. Previously undiagnosed HIV was found in 0.2% vs 0.0%, respectively, and T. pallidum antibodies in 5.9% vs 0.0%. STIs requiring antibiotic treatment comprised: active syphilis 1.2% vs 0.0%; N. gonorrhoeae 4.9% vs 0.0%; C. trachomatis 6.3% vs 5.4%, T. vaginalis 10.4% vs 0.0%; M. genitalium 6.7% vs 6.5%. One in four FSWs vs one in nine other women had one or more of these STIs at baseline. 15.8% vs 3.8% had a history of hepatitis B, 45.5% vs 22.8% had no immunity (HBs-AB <10 IU/l). Two FSWs had hepatitis C virus antibodies (0.4%) without concurrent HIV infection. Non-condom-use (last three months) for anal/vaginal sex was not associated with STIs. Independent risk factors were group sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1–4.0), age less than 25 (aOR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6–8.9), and being active in sex work for less than 1 year (aOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.3–5.3). CONCLUSION: HIV and HCV do not appear to pose a major public health problem among FSWs in Switzerland, whereas vaccination against HBV should be promoted. FSWs showed high rates of STIs requiring treatment to reduce transmission to clients and/or steady partners. FSWs should be offered low-cost or free STI screening as a public health priority.


Assuntos
Infecções por HIV , Profissionais do Sexo , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis , Feminino , Infecções por HIV/diagnóstico , Infecções por HIV/epidemiologia , Humanos , Prevalência , Trabalho Sexual , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/diagnóstico , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/epidemiologia , Suíça/epidemiologia
3.
Swiss Med Wkly ; 150: w20392, 2020 Dec 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33382077

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: In Switzerland, universal health insurance does not cover any routine testing for sexually transmitted infections (STIs), not even in individuals at high risk, and extra-genital swabbing is not standard of care. We determined the prevalence and incidence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), viral hepatitis and non-viral STIs in a multicentre prospective observational cohort of multi-partner men who have sex with men (MSM) and other men. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2016 and June 2017, we offered free STI testing to all men with multiple  sexual partners (three or more in the previous 12 months), with follow-up examinations every 6 months. We used multiplex polymerase chain-reaction testing (for Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis, Trichomonas vaginalis, Mycoplasma genitalium) on pooled swabs (pharynx, urethra/vagina, anus), and antibody tests for HIV and Treponema pallidum at every visit, and for hepatitis B/C at baseline. RESULTS: We screened 779 multi-partner MSM and 92 other men. Previously undiagnosed HIV was found in 0.5% vs 0.0%, respectively and T. pallidum antibodies in 15.3% vs 1.1%. STIs requiring antibiotic treatment comprised: active syphilis 1.7% vs 0.0%; N. gonorrhoeae 10.3% vs 0.0%; C. trachomatis 8.7% vs 1.1%. One in four MSM versus 1 in 100 other multi-partner men had any of these three STIs at baseline. 10.4% vs 1.3% had a history of hepatitis B, 31.9% vs 47.3% had no immunity (HBs-AB <10 IU/l). Ten MSM had HCV antibodies (1.4%), with 8 out of the 10 being MSM with HIV; HCV seroprevalence was 0.3% among HIV-negative MSM. In MSM, incidence of the three bacterial STIs was 25.5 per year over 333 person years of follow-up, HIV incidence was 0.3%. Non-condom-use (in the last 3 months) for anal/vaginal sex was not associated with STIs. Independent risk factors were sex with men (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 16.4) and the number of sexual partners (aOR 2.3 for >20). CONCLUSION: Among MSM, but not among other multi-partner men, STIs, mostly asymptomatic, are common. Given the high risk of onward transmission, low-cost or free routine screening of multi-partner MSM is a public health priority.


Assuntos
Infecções por HIV , Minorias Sexuais e de Gênero , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis , Feminino , Infecções por HIV/diagnóstico , Infecções por HIV/epidemiologia , Homossexualidade Masculina , Humanos , Masculino , Prevalência , Estudos Prospectivos , Estudos Soroepidemiológicos , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/diagnóstico , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/epidemiologia , Suíça/epidemiologia
4.
Biomed Res Int ; 2020: 9878453, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33224987

RESUMO

Knowledge of the sensitivities of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody tests beyond 35 days after the clinical onset of COVID-19 is insufficient. We aimed to describe positivity rate of SARS-CoV-2 assays employing three different measurement principles over a prolonged period. Two hundred sixty-eight samples from 180 symptomatic patients with COVID-19 and a reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test followed by serological investigation of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were included. We conducted three chemiluminescence (including electrochemiluminescence assay (ECLIA)), four enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and one lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) test formats. Positivity rates, as well as positive (PPVs) and negative predictive values (NPVs), were calculated for each week after the first clinical presentation for COVID-19. Furthermore, combinations of tests were assessed within an orthogonal testing approach employing two independent assays and predictive values were calculated. Heat maps were constructed to graphically illustrate operational test characteristics. During a follow-up period of more than 9 weeks, chemiluminescence assays and one ELISA IgG test showed stable positivity rates after the third week. With the exception of ECLIA, the PPVs of the other chemiluminescence assays were ≥95% for COVID-19 only after the second week. ELISA and LFIA had somewhat lower PPVs. IgM exhibited insufficient predictive characteristics. An orthogonal testing approach provided PPVs ≥ 95% for patients with a moderate pretest probability (e.g., symptomatic patients), even for tests with a low single test performance. After the second week, NPVs of all but IgM assays were ≥95% for patients with low to moderate pretest probability. The confirmation of negative results using an orthogonal algorithm with another assay provided lower NPVs than the single assays. When interpreting results from SARS-CoV-2 tests, the pretest probability, time of blood draw, and assay characteristics must be carefully considered. An orthogonal testing approach increases the accuracy of positive, but not negative, predictions.


Assuntos
Anticorpos Antivirais/imunologia , Betacoronavirus/imunologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/imunologia , Pneumonia Viral/imunologia , Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , COVID-19 , Teste para COVID-19 , Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico/métodos , Infecções por Coronavirus/sangue , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Ensaio de Imunoadsorção Enzimática/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Imunoensaio/métodos , Imunoglobulina G/sangue , Imunoglobulina M/sangue , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/sangue , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase Via Transcriptase Reversa/métodos , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Testes Sorológicos/métodos
5.
Swiss Med Wkly ; 150: w20361, 2020 10 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33105020

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The principality of Liechtenstein had its first COVID-19 case at the beginning of March 2020. After exponential growth, the pandemic’s first wave was contained, with the last case being diagnosed 52 days after the initial occurrence. AIM: To characterise the COVID-19 pandemic in Liechtenstein. METHODS: All patients diagnosed in Liechtenstein were followed up until recovery and again 6–8 weeks after symptom onset. They were contacted every 2 days to record their clinical status until the resolution of their symptoms. The diagnosis of COVID-19 was based on clinical symptoms and molecular testing. Household and close workplace contacts were included in the follow-up, which also comprised antibody testing. In addition, public health measures installed during the pandemic in Liechtenstein are summarised. RESULTS: During the first wave, 5% of the population obtained a reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction test. A total of 95 patients (median age 39 years) were diagnosed with COVID-19 (82 who resided in Liechtenstein), resulting in an incidence in Liechtenstein of 0.211%. One patient, aged 94, died (mortality rate 1%). Only 62% of patients could retrospectively identify a potential source of infection. Testing the patients’ household and close workplace contacts (n = 170) with antibody tests revealed that 25% of those tested were additional COVID-19 cases, a quarter of whom were asymptomatic. Those households which adhered to strict isolation measures had a significantly lower rate of affected household members than those who didn’t follow such measures. The national public health measures never restricted free movement of residents. Masks were only mandatory in healthcare settings. The use of home working for the general workforce was promoted. Gatherings were prohibited. Schools, universities, certain public spaces (like sports facilities and playgrounds), childcare facilities, nonessential shops, restaurants and bars were closed. Social distancing, hygienic measures, solidarity and supporting individuals who were at risk were the main pillars of the public health campaigns. CONCLUSION: The close collaboration of all relevant stakeholders allowed for the complete workup of all COVID-19 patients nationwide. A multitude of factors (e.g., young age of the patients, low-threshold access to testing, close monitoring of cases, high alertness and adherence to public health measures by the population) led to the early containment of the first wave of the pandemic, with a very low rate of serious outcomes. Antibody testing for SARS-CoV-2 revealed a substantial proportion of undiagnosed COVID-19 cases among close contacts of the patients.


Assuntos
Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis , Infecções por Coronavirus , Monitorização Fisiológica/métodos , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Adulto , Doenças Assintomáticas/epidemiologia , Betacoronavirus/isolamento & purificação , COVID-19 , Teste para COVID-19 , Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico/métodos , Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico/estatística & dados numéricos , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis/métodos , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis/organização & administração , Busca de Comunicante , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Feminino , Humanos , Incidência , Liechtenstein/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Clin Chem Lab Med ; 58(12): 2131-2140, 2020 08 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32866113

RESUMO

Objectives The sensitivity of molecular and serological methods for COVID-19 testing in an epidemiological setting is not well described. The aim of the study was to determine the frequency of negative RT-PCR results at first clinical presentation as well as negative serological results after a follow-up of at least 3 weeks. Methods Among all patients seen for suspected COVID-19 in Liechtenstein (n=1921), we included initially RT-PCR positive index patients (n=85) as well as initially RT-PCR negative (n=66) for follow-up with SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. Antibodies were detected with seven different commercially available immunoassays. Frequencies of negative RT-PCR and serology results in individuals with COVID-19 were determined and compared to those observed in a validation cohort of Swiss patients (n=211). Results Among COVID-19 patients in Liechtenstein, false-negative RT-PCR at initial presentation was seen in 18% (12/66), whereas negative serology in COVID-19 patients was 4% (3/85). The validation cohort showed similar frequencies: 2/66 (3%) for negative serology, and 16/155 (10%) for false negative RT-PCR. COVID-19 patients with negative follow-up serology tended to have a longer disease duration (p=0.05) and more clinical symptoms than other patients with COVID-19 (p<0.05). The antibody titer from quantitative immunoassays was positively associated with the number of disease symptoms and disease duration (p<0.001). Conclusions RT-PCR at initial presentation in patients with suspected COVID-19 can miss infected patients. Antibody titers of SARS-CoV-2 assays are linked to the number of disease symptoms and the duration of disease. One in 25 patients with RT-PCR-positive COVID-19 does not develop antibodies detectable with frequently employed and commercially available immunoassays.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/genética , Betacoronavirus/imunologia , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase em Tempo Real , Testes Sorológicos , Adulto , Reações Falso-Positivas , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , SARS-CoV-2 , Fatores de Tempo , Adulto Jovem
7.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 10(8)2020 Aug 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32823852

RESUMO

While lateral flow test formats can be utilized with whole blood and low sample volumes, their diagnostic characteristics are inferior to immunoassays based on chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) technology. CLIAs and ELISAs can be automated to a high degree but commonly require larger serum or plasma volumes for sample processing. We addressed the suitability of EDTA-anticoagulated whole blood as an alternative sample material for antibody testing against SARS-CoV-2 by electro-CLIA (ECLIA; Roche, Rotkreuz, Switzerland) and ELISA (IgG and IgA; Euroimmun, Germany). Simultaneously drawn venous serum and EDTA-anticoagulated whole blood samples from 223 individuals were included. Correction of the whole blood results for hematocrit led to a good agreement with the serum results for weakly to moderately positive antibody signals. In receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis, all three assays displayed comparable diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve (AUC)) using corrected whole blood and serum (AUCs: 0.97 for ECLIA and IgG ELISA; 0.84 for IgA ELISA). In conclusion, our results suggest that the investigated assays can reliably detect antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in hemolyzed whole blood anticoagulated with EDTA. Correction of these results for hematocrit is suggested. This study demonstrates that the automated processing of whole blood for identification of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies with common ECLIA and ELISA methods is accurate and feasible.

9.
Am J Trop Med Hyg ; 101(5): 1170-1173, 2019 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31571569

RESUMO

Human sparganosis is a cestode infection which is neglected as a differential diagnosis outside endemic countries. Diagnosis and therapy may be challenging depending on the clinical presentation and anatomic localization. The disease manifests predominantly as subcutaneous nodule(s) or intracranial mass lesion(s). Infection is primarily acquired by ingesting raw or undercooked amphibian or reptile flesh or by drinking water containing copepods. We report an unusual case of subcutaneous Spirometra erinaceieuropaei sparganosis presenting with two nonmigratory nodules in close proximity to each other on the right thigh of a Thai woman living in Switzerland.


Assuntos
Emigrantes e Imigrantes , Esparganose/diagnóstico , Esparganose/patologia , Spirometra/isolamento & purificação , Tela Subcutânea/parasitologia , Animais , Sequência de Bases , DNA de Helmintos/genética , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Esparganose/epidemiologia , Esparganose/cirurgia , Spirometra/genética , Suíça , Tailândia/epidemiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...