Study and interest of cellular load in respiratory samples for the optimization of molecular virological diagnosis in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory viral diagnosis of upper respiratory tract infections has largely developed through multiplex molecular techniques. Although the sensitivity of different types of upper respiratory tract samples seems to be correlated to the number of sampled cells, this link remains largely unexplored. METHODS: Our study included 800 upper respiratory tract specimens of which 400 negative and 400 positive for viral detection in multiplex PCR. All samples were selected and matched for age in these 2 groups. For the positive group, samples were selected for the detected viral species. RESULTS: Among the factors influencing the cellularity were the type of sample (p < 0.0001); patient age (p < 0.001); viral positive or negative nature of the sample (p = 0.002); and, for the positive samples, the number of viral targets detected (0.004 < p < 0.049) and viral species. CONCLUSION: The cellular load of upper respiratory samples is multifactorial and occurs for many in the sensitivity of molecular detection. However it was not possible to determine a minimum cellularity threshold allowing molecular viral detection. The differences according to the type of virus remain to be studied on a larger scale.

Evaluation of four commercial real-time RT-PCR kits for the detection of dengue viruses in clinical samples.

BACKGROUND: Dengue is the most frequent arthropod-borne viral disease worldwide. Because dengue manifestations are similar to those of many other febrile syndromes, the availability of dengue-specific laboratory tests is useful for the differential diagnosis. Timely and accurate diagnosis of dengue virus (DENV) infection is important for appropriate management of complications, pathophysiological studies, epidemiological investigations and optimization of vector-control measures. Several "in-house" reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) methods have been developed to detect, type and/or quantify DENV. Standardized dengue RT-PCR kits with internal controls have been recently introduced, but need clinical evaluation. We assessed the performances of 4 commercial DENV real-time RT-PCR kits. FINDINGS: The 4 kits were evaluated using a panel of 162 samples positive with an existing in-place hemi-nested RT-PCR used for routine DENV-infection diagnosis in patients with acute-febrile disease. The panel included 46 DENV-1, 37 DENV-2, 33 DENV-3, and 46 DENV-4. Also, 70 negative serum specimens were used to determine specificity. Geno-Sen's Dengue 1-4 Real-Time RT-PCR kit was the only assay to provide quantification using standards, but lacked sensitivity for DENV-4 detection. The SimplexaTM Dengue RT-PCR assay, with 151 (93.2% [95% confidence interval, 89.3-97.1]) positive samples, had significantly higher sensitivity than the other 3 kits; in a complementary evaluation of 111 consecutive patients' samples, its performance and genotyping agreed with the hemi-nested gold-standard assay. CONCLUSIONS: The SimplexaTM Dengue RT-PCR's good performance to detect and genotype DENV1-4 requires further evaluation in multicenter and prospective studies, particularly in settings of clinical diagnosis during dengue outbreaks.

Diagnostic biologique de la dengue.

Dengue is the most important disease caused by an arbovirus worldwide. Its clinical manifestations are very large from asymptomatic infections to severe diseases with fatal outcome. No effective antiviral treatment or vaccine is available. Thus, a rapid and accurate diagnosis is of paramount importance both for better clinical case management and surveillance. Diagnosis methods depend on the time clinical signs appeared. Within the 7 first days of fever, direct tests are preferred. RT-PCR methods are sensitive, specific, and can identify viral serotypes. Conventional RT-PCR will probably be replaced by real time PCR as soon as standardised and accurate assays for the four serotypes will be available. Serology (EIA) is used only after 7 days of disease, i.e. late in the course of dengue; it is accurate, specific but not discriminatory for serotypes and high cross-reactive. NS1 antigen detection still lack of clinical sensitivity and viral isolation is too fastidious. Even though ameliorations are necessary, viral detection by RT-PCR remains the best tool in clinical settings for a rapid diagnosis of severe dengue infections.

Performance Evaluation of the VIDAS(®) Measles IgG Assay and Its Diagnostic Value for Measuring IgG Antibody Avidity in Measles Virus Infection.

The objective of this study is primarily to compare the performance of the VIDAS(®) Measles immunoglobulin (Ig)G assay to that of two other serological assays using an immunoassay technique, Enzygnost(®) Anti-measles Virus/IgG (Siemens) and Measles IgG CAPTURE EIA(®) (Microimmune). The sensitivity and the agreement of the VIDAS(®) Measles IgG assay compared to the Enzygnost(®) Anti-measles Virus/IgG assay and the Measles IgG CAPTURE EIA(®) assay are 100%, 97.2% and 99.0%, 98.4%, respectively. The very low number of negative sera for IgG antibodies does not allow calculation of specificity. As a secondary objective, we have evaluated the ability of the VIDAS(®) Measles IgG assay to measure anti-measles virus IgG antibody avidity with the help of the VIDAS(®) CMV IgG Avidity reagent, using 76 sera from subjects with measles and 238 other sera. Different groups of populations were analyzed. In the primary infection measles group, the mean IgG avidity index was 0.16 (range of 0.07 to 0.93) compared to 0.79 (range of 0.25 to 1) in the serum group positive for IgG antibodies and negative for IgM. These data allow to define a weak anti-measles virus IgG antibody avidity as an avidity index (AI) < 0.3 and a strong avidity as an AI > 0.6. The VIDAS(®) Measles IgG assay has a performance equivalent to that of other available products. Its use, individual and quick, is well adapted to testing for anti-measles immunity in exposed subjects.

NS3 protease polymorphism and natural resistance to protease inhibitors in French patients infected with HCV genotypes 1-5.

BACKGROUND: Resistant HCV populations may pre-exist in patients before NS3 protease inhibitor therapy and would likely be selected under specific antiviral pressure. The higher prevalence and lower rate of response to treatment associated with HCV genotype 1 infections has led to drug discovery efforts being focused primarily on enzymes produced by this genotype. Protease inhibitors may also be useful for non-genotype-1-infected patients, notably for non-responders. METHODS: We investigated the prevalence of dominant resistance mutations and polymorphism in 298 HCV protease-inhibitor-naive patients infected with HCV genotypes 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5. Genotype-specific NS3 primers were designed to amplify and sequence the NS3 protease gene. RESULTS: None of the 233 analysed sequences contained major telaprevir (TVR) or boceprevir (BOC) resistance mutations (R155K/T/M, A156S/V/T and V170A). Some substitutions (V36L, T54S, Q80K/R, D168Q and V170T) linked to low or moderate decreases in HCV sensitivity to protease inhibitors were prevalent according to genotype (between 2% and 100%). Other than genotype signature mutations at positions 36, 80 and 168, the most frequent substitution was T54S (4 genotype 1 and 2 genotype 4 sequences). All genotype 2-5 sequences had the non-genotype-1 signature V36L mutation known to confer low-level resistance to both TVR and BOC. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed an HCV protease NS3 inhibitor resistance genotyping tool suitable for use with HCV genotypes 1-5. Polymorphism data is valuable for interpreting genotypic resistance profiles in cases of failure of anti-HCV NS3 protease treatment.