Hepatitis E Virus Infection in Blood Donors and Risk to Patients in the United States and Canada.

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is the most common cause of acute hepatitis worldwide including large water-borne outbreaks, zoonotic infections and transfusion transmissions. Several countries have initiated or are considering blood donor screening in response to high HEV-RNA donation prevalence leading to transfusion-transmission risk. Because HEV transmission is more common through food sources, the efficacy of blood donor screening alone may be limited. HEV-nucleic acids in 101 489 blood donations in the United States and Canada were studied. A risk-based decision-making framework was used to evaluate the quantitative risks and cost-benefit of HEV-blood donation screening in Canada comparing three scenarios: no screening, screening blood for all transfused patients or screening blood for only those at greatest risk. HEV-RNA prevalence in the United States was one per 16 908 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1:5786-1:81987), whereas Canadian HEV-RNA prevalence was one per 4615 (95% CI, 1:2579-1:9244). Although 4-fold greater, Canadian HEV-RNA prevalence was not significantly higher than in the United States. Viral loads ranged from 20 to 3080 international units per mL; all successfully typed infections were genotype 3. No HEV-RNA false-positive donations were identified for 100 percent specificity. Without donation screening, heart and lung transplant recipients had the greatest HEV-infection risk (1:366962) versus kidney transplant recipients with the lowest (1:2.8 million) at costs of $225 546 to $561 810 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for partial or universal screening, respectively. Higher cost per QALY would be expected in the United States. Thus, HEV prevalence in North America is lower than in countries performing blood donation screening, and if implemented, is projected to be costly under any scenario.

Duplex nucleic acid test for the detection of chikungunya and dengue RNA viruses in blood donations.

BACKGROUND: Chikungunya (CHIKV) and dengue (DENV) viruses are primarily mosquito-borne, but transfusion transmission can occur (DENV) or is likely (CHIKV). In the absence of commercially available blood screening assays, a variety of strategies to ensure recipient safety in the face of expanding CHIKV and/or DENV outbreaks have been used. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Performance of cobas CHIKV/DENV, a qualitative RNA detection assay for use on the cobas 6800/8800 Systems, was evaluated at two sites (Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. [RMS], and the American Red Cross [ARC]). Analytical sensitivity, genotype inclusion, correlation with other assays, and reproducibility used clinical CHIKV- or DENV-positive samples and secondary standards for DENV Types 1 to 4 and for three CHIKV genotypes (Asian; East Central South African; and West African); each secondary standard was traceable to international reference panels or reagents. Evaluation of analytic specificity assessed other microorganisms for interference and cross-reactivity; clinical specificity was determined by individually testing 10,528 volunteer blood donations from the continental United States. RESULTS: The 50 and 95% limit of detection (LoD) obtained by RMS for CHIKV, Asian genotype was 1.8 and 6.8 Detectable Units (DU)/mL, respectively, and 0.14 and 0.63 International Units (IU)/mL, respectively for DENV-1. No significant differences in detection occurred by testing at a second site, the ARC (2.4 and 10.5 DU/mL for CHIKV and 0.15 and 0.60 IU/mL for DENV). Clinical specificity was 100% (95% confidence interval, 99.965%-100%) for CHIKV and DENV. CONCLUSIONS: The high sensitivity and specificity of the cobas CHIKV/DENV test, as demonstrated in these evaluations, indicate its suitability for blood donation screening.

International survey on the impact of parasitic infections: frequency of transmission and current mitigation strategies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Globally, blood safety interventions have been successful in mitigating risk of the major transfusion-transmitted (TT) viruses. However, strategies that address risk from parasites are comparatively limited. TT parasites are often regional in nature, posing unique challenges; we sought to understand their impact on blood safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic questionnaire was distributed to transfusion medicine leaders in 100 countries. The survey focused on specific questions pertaining to four parasitic diseases: babesiosis, Chagas, leishmaniasis and malaria. Respondents provided data on historical TT cases, local epidemiology, policies to mitigate risk and an assessment of public health perceptions for each aetiologic agent. RESULTS: Twenty-eight (28%) surveys were returned from countries in Europe (n = 13), the Americas (n = 6), Africa (n = 4), Asia (n = 3) and Oceana (n = 2). Historically, no cases of TT leishmaniasis were reported, TT babesiosis was exclusive to Canada and the USA, TT Chagas was limited to the Americas and Spain, while TT malaria was cosmopolitan. Mitigation efforts varied widely; malaria was the most frequently tested parasitic disease. The public's perception of risk for parasitic agents was low, while that of health authorities in endemic countries was higher. CONCLUSION: The global impact of parasitic infections on blood safety and related mitigation efforts varied widely by parasite epidemiology, test availability, public health priorities and socioeconomic constraints. While parasites continue to pose a risk to blood safety, the successful mitigation of viral risk has elevated the prominence of TT parasites in many locations, thereby requiring consideration of mitigation efforts.

Blood donor testing for hepatitis B virus in the United States: is there a case for continuation of hepatitis B surface antigen detection?

BACKGROUND: In the United States, blood donor testing for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) was initiated in the early 1970s. More recently, testing for antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc) and hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA have been added. The incidence of hepatitis B has been declining. This study reviews the current status of testing and questions the need for continuation of HBsAg testing. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: From July 2011 to June 2015, a total of 22.4 million donations were serologically tested for HBsAg and anti-HBc and for HBV-DNA by nucleic acid testing (NAT). All reactive results were evaluated and a subset of donations that were either potential NAT yield (seronegative) or serologically positive but nonreactive by HBV NAT in minipools (MPs) of 16 were further evaluated by individual donation (ID)-NAT. Samples with detectable HBV DNA were defined as actively infected and considered potentially infectious. RESULTS: Routine testing plus supplemental ID-NAT identified 2035 samples representing active infection including 1965 with anti-HBc, 1602 with HBsAg, and 1453 with HBV DNA by MP-NAT, for respective rates per hundred-thousand donations of 9.10, 8.78, 7.16, and 6.50, continuing the downward trend previously observed. There were 29 HBV DNA-yield samples (1:771,389), 35 HBsAg-yield samples (anti-HBc nonreactive), and 404 with occult hepatitis B infection. There were six samples with HBsAg and HBV DNA detectable only by ID-NAT in the absence of anti-HBc; additional testing was consistent with extremely low or negligible levels of DNA. CONCLUSIONS: Point estimates of HBV infection rates among blood donors continue to decline, as do those for incidence and residual risk. Elimination of HBsAg screening would have negligible impact, with a risk less than 1 per 4 million donations.

Frequency of Trypanosoma cruzi parasitemia among infected blood donors with a potential association between parasite lineage and transfusion transmission.

BACKGROUND: Trypanosoma cruzi is endemic to the Americas where it demonstrates multiple lineages over a vast geographic range (i.e., United States to Argentina). These lineages possess divergent geographic and biologic characteristics, including variations in disease manifestations. Herein, we report the frequency of parasitemia among seropositive US blood donors and the potential association between parasite lineage and transfusion transmission. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Blood donors identified as T. cruzi seropositive during screening were enrolled in follow-up studies, including hemoculture testing and a risk factor questionnaire. Positive hemocultures were expanded to obtain sufficient parasites for molecular lineage determination and analysis. Country of birth, obtained from the questionnaire, was used to predict parasite lineage in the absence of demonstrable parasitemia for infected donors. RESULTS: Eighteen (6.8%) of 263 seropositive donors were hemoculture positive. Among the 17 hemocultures expanded for lineage determination, TcV was identified more frequently (n = 12), compared to TcI (n = 2), TcII (n = 1), and TcVI (n = 2). When presumptive parasite lineages were compared to hemoculture results, only two of 157 (1.3%) TcI versus 13 of 38 (34.2%) TcII/TcV/TcVI non-US donors were parasitemic; three of 44 (6.8%) US donors were TcV or TcVI. CONCLUSIONS: Based on lineage determination for donors with parasitemia; hemoculture positivity associated with presumptive parasite lineage; and implicated donors from US, Canadian, and Spanish transfusion cases, donors from Southern South America are significantly more likely to have parasitemia and transmit infection to blood recipients (TcII, TcV, or TcVI vs. TcI). Thus, parasite lineage may be associated with risk of transfusion-transmitted T. cruzi.

Antibody levels correlate with detection of Trypanosoma cruzi DNA by sensitive polymerase chain reaction assays in seropositive blood donors and possible resolution of infection over time.

BACKGROUND: The clinical significance of anti-Trypanosoma cruzi low-level reactive samples is incompletely understood. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive rates and antibody levels among seropositive blood donors in three countries are described. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Follow-up samples were collected from T. cruzi-seropositive donors from 2008 through 2010 in the United States (n = 195) and Honduras (n = 58). Also 143 samples from Brazil in 1996 to 2002, originally positive by three serologic assays, were available and paired with contemporary follow-up samples from these donors. All samples were retested with Ortho enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). PCR assays were performed on coded sample panels by two laboratories (Blood Systems Research Institute [BSRI] and American Red Cross Holland Laboratory [ARC]) that amplified kinetoplast minicircle DNA sequences of T. cruzi. RESULTS: PCR testing at BSRI yielded slightly higher overall sensitivity and specificity (33 and 98%) compared with those at the ARC (28 and 94%). Among seropositive donors, PCR-positive rates varied by country (p < 0.0001) for the BSRI laboratory: Brazil (57%), Honduras (32%), and the United States (14%). ELISA signal-to-cutoff ratios (S/CO) were significantly higher for PCR-positive compared to PCR-negative donors (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). Additionally, PCR-negative Brazilian donors exhibited greater frequencies of antibody decline over time versus PCR-positive donors (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: For all three countries, persistent DNA positivity correlated with higher ELISA S/CO values, suggesting that high-level seroreactivity reflects chronic parasitemia. Significant S/CO declines in 10% of the PCR-negative Brazilian donors may indicate seroreversion after parasite clearance in the absence of treatment.

Analyzing actual risk in malaria-deferred donors through selective serologic testing.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 150,000 US blood donors are deferred annually for travel to malaria-endemic areas. However, the majority do not travel to the high-risk areas of Africa associated with transfusion-transmitted malaria (TTM) but visit low-risk areas such as Mexico. This study tests for Plasmodium infection among malaria-deferred donors, particularly those visiting Mexico. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Blood donors deferred for malaria risk (travel, residence, or previous infection) provided blood samples and completed a questionnaire. Plasma was tested for Plasmodium antibodies by enzyme immunoassay (EIA); repeat-reactive (RR) samples were considered positive and tested by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Accepted donors provided background testing data. RESULTS: During 2005 to 2011, a total of 5610 malaria-deferred donors were tested by EIA, including 5412 travel deferrals. Overall, 88 (1.6%) were EIA RR; none were PCR positive. Forty-nine (55.7%) RR donors previously had malaria irrespective of deferral category, including 34 deferred for travel. Among 1121 travelers to Mexico, 90% visited Quintana Roo (no or very low risk), but just 2.2% visited Oaxaca/Chiapas (moderate or high risk). Only two Mexican travelers tested RR; both previously had malaria not acquired in Mexico. CONCLUSIONS: Travel to Mexico represents a large percentage of US donors deferred for malaria risk; however, these donors primarily visit no- or very-low-risk areas. No malaria cases acquired in Mexico were identified thereby supporting previous risk estimates. Consideration should be given to allowing blood donations from U.S. donors who travel to Quintana Roo and other low-risk areas in Mexico. A more effective approach to preventing TTM would be to defer all donors with a history of malaria, even if remote.

Impact of donor deferrals for malaria on blood availability in the United States.

BACKGROUND: US blood availability is negatively impacted by residence or travel-related deferrals designed to prevent transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 group O, variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, Leishmania, and malaria. Generally, travel and residence deferrals lack sensitivity and specificity to identify infected donors, particularly for malaria. This study evaluated trends in malaria deferrals and their impact on blood availability from 2000 through 2006. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: An American Red Cross (ARC) research database was used to monitor trends in deferrals for exposure to Plasmodium spp., the causative agents of malaria. Annual deferral rates were classified as travel, residence, and history of malaria during 2000 through 2006. Overall yearly donation rates for acceptable donors were determined and used to estimate donations lost due to malaria-related deferrals. RESULTS: Approximately 29 million donors presented at ARC collection sites and 316,495 (1.1%) were deferred for malaria risk. More than 91 percent of malaria deferrals were for travel to endemic countries; travel deferrals showed a significant increase (p < 0.001) throughout the study period. Calculations of yearly donation rates suggested that more than 540,000 potential ARC blood donations were lost to malaria deferrals during the 7-year period. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of malaria deferrals were for travel to endemic areas; however, few US donors visit those areas associated with most US cases of malaria or transfusion-transmitted malaria. Current interventions fail to capture many semi-immune donors, those at greatest risk for transmitting infection. Considerations should be given to selective screening and permanent deferral of donors with a history of malaria.