Quantification of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 p24 antigen and antibody rivals human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA and CD4+ enumeration for prognosis. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Intravenous Immunoglobulin Clinical Trial Study Group.

BACKGROUND: The sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of baseline serum concentrations of HIV-1 immune complex-dissociated (ICD) p24 antigen for predicting disease progression and mortality were assessed and compared with results obtained for HIV-1 ICD p24 antigen with HIV-1 p24 antibody and for HIV-1 RNA with CD4+ lymphocyte percent. METHODS: Data from HIV-infected children enrolled in a North American clinical trial (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Intravenous Immunoglobulin Clinical Trial) were analyzed. Disease progression was defined as growth failure, CD4+ lymphocyte percent decline to <15% after study entry or development of an AIDS-defining opportunistic infection. RESULTS: Baseline samples were available for ICD p24 antigen testing (median concentration, 319 pg/ml; range, <50 to 15,640) in 240 children. The combination of detectable ICD p24 antigen and low p24 antibody was more sensitive but less specific than the combination of high HIV-1 RNA and low CD4+ lymphocyte percent in predicting disease progression and mortality. Using receiver operating characteristic curves, the specificity of ICD p24 antigen with p24 antibody for classifying children's disease progression or mortality was as great as, or greater than, HIV-1 RNA with CD4+ lymphocyte percent at points on the curve corresponding to higher sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ICD p24 antigen with p24 antibody to identify children at high risk of disease progression or mortality could be a viable alternative to the more expensive and technically difficult HIV-1 RNA and CD4+ lymphocyte assays in resource-poor settings, including developing countries where the majority of children with HIV-1 infection reside.

Health habits and risk factors among truck drivers visiting a health booth during a trucker trade show.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to provide general information on the personal characteristics, health status, and health interests reported by long-haul truck drivers. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey was conducted based on a convenience sample. Statistical independence between comparison groups for driver type, age, and gender were tested with the Pearson chi-square test. SETTING: The study population consisted of truck drivers who stopped at one of 65 truck stops participating in a trucker trade show. SUBJECTS: Subjects were 2,945 male self-identified truck drivers and 353 female self-identified truck drivers who visited health booths at the trade show. It was estimated that two thirds of visitors to the health booth participated. MEASURES: A self-administered, close-ended questionnaire recorded the participant's personal characteristics, health status, and health interests. Blood pressure was measured by trained volunteers. RESULTS: A large percentage of male truck drivers smoked cigarettes (54% vs. 30% of U.S. white males), did not exercise regularly (92%), were overweight (50% vs. 25% of U.S. white males), and/or were not aware they had high blood pressure (66% vs. 46% of U.S. population). Also, 23% of surveyed truck drivers tested positive on one measure of alcoholism. CONCLUSIONS: Although a scientific sample frame was not used, the health status and lifestyle observed in this study suggest truck drivers would clearly benefit from a health education and promotion program. The truck stops should be evaluated as a possible setting for such a program.

Potential for misleading associations between exposure and disease when reviewing multiple epidemiologic studies.

In reviewing evidence from multiple epidemiologic studies, a statistical artifact can leave an impression that a relationship exists between an exposure and a disease even if none exists. In this paper, two fundamental properties of probability were applied to hypothetical situations where results from independent studies were combined. It was evident that, even when a cause-effect relationship did not exist, several studies still appeared to confirm the relationship. This statistical artifact was related primarily to the total number of independent studies reviewed and to a lesser degree to the size of a given study. Thus, in examining evidence for a cause-effect relationship from multiple published articles, some studies are likely to show the association and some not, even if no association exists. If only the studies which show the association are considered, without regard to the total number of studies, the reviewer can be misled. This statistical effect is illustrated with an example from the rubber worker literature.

Antigen testing for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and the magnet effect: will the benefit of a new HIV test be offset by the numbers of higher risk, test-seeking donors attracted to blood centers? Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study.

BACKGROUND: There currently is debate on whether to include new assays for viral antigens and nucleic acids in the battery of screening tests applied to all blood donations. Proposals call for implementation of p24 antigen screening tests to help identify donors who are infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) but have not yet seroconverted (window-period donors). There is concern, however, that people at higher risk for HIV infection will be attracted to blood centers in order to obtain the results of an HIV assay that is not routinely available elsewhere. Therefore, the benefit of antigen testing may be offset by an increase in the HIV incidence rate among blood donors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Estimates were obtained from previous reports for the HIV incidence rate among blood donors, the percentage of donations from test-seeking donors, the duration of the HIV-infectious window period, and the performance of p24 antigen screening assays. Sensitivity analyses were performed by using various percentages of test-seeking donors following implementation of antigen testing and various HIV incidence rate ratios of test-seekers to nonseekers. Hypothetical residual HIV risks were calculated for multiple scenarios and compared to the current estimate of HIV risk without antigen screening of blood donations. RESULTS: If antigen testing reduces the window period by 27 percent (e.g., from 22 days to 16 days), and the HIV incidence rate among test-seekers is 30 times that among nonseekers, then the benefit of antigen testing will be eliminated if the percentage of test-seekers (currently estimated at 3.2%) increases to 5.7 percent. If antigen testing reduces the window period by approximately 45 percent (e.g., from 22 days to 10 days or from 13 days to 6 days) and the HIV incidence rate ratio (test-seekers vs. nonseekers) is assumed to be equal to the HIV prevalence ratio (5.3), then the percentage of donations from test-seeking donors would have to increase to 25 percent of all donations to offset the benefit of antigen screening. CONCLUSION: This model helps identify the key measures for assessing the potential adverse effect of increased test seeking as a consequence of the addition of p24 antigen (or other direct virus) assays to blood donor screening programs. In most scenarios, the beneficial effect of antigen screening exceeded the potential detrimental effect of attracting higher-risk, test-seeking donors. The possibility cannot be ruled out, however, that a subgroup of high-risk, test-seeking donors attracted to the blood centers by a new HIV test will offset the reduction in the residual risk of HIV infection associated with antigen screening.

The risk of transfusion-transmitted viral infections. The Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate estimates of the risk of transfusion-transmitted infectious disease are essential for monitoring the safety of the blood supply and evaluating the potential effect of new screening tests. We estimated the risk of transmitting the human Immuno-deficiency virus (HIV), the human T-cell lymphotropic virus (HTLV), the hepatitis C virus (HCV), and the hepatitis B virus (HBV) from screened blood units donated during the window period following a recent, undetected infection. METHODS: Using data on 586,507 persons who each donated blood more than once between 1991 and 1993 at five blood centers (for a total of 2,318,356 allogeneic blood donations), we calculated the incidence rates of seroconversion among those whose donations passed all the screening tests used. We adjusted these rates for the estimated duration of the infectious window period for each virus. We then estimated the further reductions in risk that would result from the use of new and more sensitive viral-antigen or nucleic acid screening tests. RESULTS: Among donors whose units passed all screening tests, the risks of giving blood during an infectious window period were estimated as follows: for HIV, 1 in 493,000 (95 percent confidence interval, 202,000 to 2,778,000); for HTLV, 1 in 641,000 (256,000 to 2,000,000); for HCV, 1 in 103,000 (28,000 to 288,000); and for HBV, 1 in 63,000 (31,000 to 147,000). HBV and HCV accounted for 88 percent of the aggregate risk of 1 in 34,000. New screening tests that shorten the window periods for the four viruses should reduce the risks by 27 to 72 percent. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of transmitting HIV, HTLV, HCV, or HBV infection by the transfusion of screened blood is very small, and new screening tests will reduce the risk even further.

Declining value of alanine aminotransferase in screening of blood donors to prevent posttransfusion hepatitis B and C virus infection. The Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study.

BACKGROUND: Since the mid-1980s, blood banks in the United States have screened donors for elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT) in an effort to prevent posttransfusion hepatitis. The present study was designed to quantitate the residual value of ALT screening following the implementation of hepatitis C virus (HCV) assays. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Two approaches were used. First, a database of 2.3 million donations made by 586,507 volunteer blood donors between 1991 and 1993 was used to compare the incidence of seroconversion to hepatitis B virus (HBV) and HCV marker positivity in donors with elevated ALT values and with normal ALT values. Second, the duration of ALT elevation prior to HBV and HCV seroconversion was determined from 34 well-documented cases of posttransfusion HBV and HCV; elevated-ALT window periods were multiplied by rates of HBV and HCV incidence in donors to project the yield of ALT screening. Predictive value and cost-effectiveness analyses were also performed to compare the value of ALT screening before and after HCV screening was implemented. RESULTS: Both approaches indicate that ALT testing does not detect HBV in the window phase but does currently identify approximately 3 HCV window-phase donations per 1 million donations; this contrasts with ALT detection of approximately 1800 HCV-infectious units per 1 million donations prior to anti-HCV screening. Currently, only 8 in 10,000 donated units with elevated ALT (negative anti-HCV) are infected with HCV. The cost of continued ALT screening was estimated at $7,931,000 per quality-adjusted year of life saved. CONCLUSION: The yield, predictive value, and cost-effectiveness of ALT screening of blood donors have declined dramatically with the implementation of progressively improved anti-HCV assays. ALT screening of volunteer blood donors should be discontinued.

Loss of volunteer blood donors because of unconfirmed enzyme immunoassay screening results. Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study.

BACKGROUND: Blood donors who test repeatably reactive on enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and are not confirmed as positive are a continuing problem for blood banks. Units are discarded and donors are deferred, in spite of multiple studies indicating that such donors are very rarely infected with the transmissible agents. Few data are available, however, with which to evaluate whether the discarded units are more likely to come from particular demographic subgroups. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study database of over 2 million allogeneic whole-blood donations collected in the years 1991 through 1993 was utilized. The prevalence of false-positive and indeterminate test results within demographic subgroups was computed for antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis C virus, and human T-lymphotropic virus (anti-HIV, anti-HCV, anti-HTLV, respectively) and hepatitis B surface antigen (false-positive only) as the proportion of donations that were repeatably reactive on EIA but negative or indeterminate on the confirmatory or supplemental test. RESULTS: Several demographic groups with increased prevalence of false-positive and indeterminate anti-HIV results were the same females, younger age groups, blacks, and first-time donors. Likewise, many of the demographic subgroups with increased prevalence of false-positive and indeterminate anti-HCV results were similar: older age groups, non-whites, lower education levels, first-time donors, donors making directed donations, and donors who had received transfusions. For anti-HTLV, by contrast, the oldest group had the highest prevalence of false-positive results but the lowest prevalence of indeterminate results: blacks had the lowest prevalence of false positive results but the highest prevalence of indeterminate results. CONCLUSION: If units that test repeatably reactive on EIA but that are not confirmed as positive are almost always from individuals not infected with the virus in question, then these results indicate that there may be sex-, race-, and/or age-linked proteins cross-reacting with the test kit materials. Elucidation of these antigenic determinates and their subsequent removal should be a priority.

A method for estimating hepatitis B virus incidence rates in volunteer blood donors. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study.

BACKGROUND: Calculations of the incidence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections in the blood donor setting that are based solely on data for seroconversion to hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) will underestimate the incidence due to the transient nature of antigenemia. Estimates based on antibody to hepatitis B core antigen will overestimate the incidence due to false-positive results caused by the nonspecificity of the test. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Serologic test results were obtained from multiple-time volunteer donors at five United States blood centers from January 1991 through December 1993. The observed HBsAg seroconversion rate was multiplied by an adjustment factor, derived from the weighted average probability of a positive HBsAg test for HBV-infected donors who become chronic carriers, for donors with a primary antibody response without detectable antigenemia, and for donors who develop transient antigenemia. RESULTS: Among 586,507 multiple-time donors giving 2,318,356 donations and observed for 822,426 person-years, the HBsAg incidence rate was 4.01 per 100,000 person-years. On the basis of prior reports of the duration of HBsAg positivity and the observed distribution of interdonation intervals among the study group, there was an estimated 53-percent chance that an HBV-infected donor with transient antigenemia would have a positive HBsAg test result. If 70 percent of newly HBV-infected adults have transient antigenemia, 25 percent have a primary antibody response without primary antigenemia, and 5 percent become chronic carriers, the overall chance of being detected by the HBsAg test was 42 percent, for an adjustment factor of 2.38. The total HBV incidence rate, therefore, was estimated to be 9.54 per 100,000 person-years. CONCLUSION: The crude HBV incidence rate observed from HBsAg test results will underestimate the true rate. The adjusted HBV incidence rate should be used in applications such as estimations of residual HBV risk to the blood supply and projections of the benefits of screening for HBV DNA.

Demographic characteristics and prevalence of serologic markers among donors who use the confidential unit exclusion process: the Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study.

BACKGROUND: Most blood centers utilize a confidential unit exclusion (CUE) process, intended to reduce the risk of transfusion-associated infectious diseases by allowing high-risk donors confidentially to exclude their blood from use for transfusion. The effectiveness of this method remains controversial. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Confirmatory or supplemental test results for antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus, human T-lymphotropic virus type I, and hepatitis C virus, as well as hepatitis B surface antigen and syphilis and screening test results for antibodies to hepatitis B core (antigen) and alanine aminotransferase levels were obtained for approximately 1.8 million units donated during 1991 and 1992 at five blood centers within the United States. The prevalences of these infectious disease markers in units that the donors confidentially excluded (CUE+) and units that the donors did not exclude (CUE-) were calculated and examined within demographic subgroups. RESULTS: Units that were CUE+ were 8 to 41 times more likely to be seropositive for antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C virus, hepatitis B surface antigen, and syphilis and three to four times more likely to react for antibody to hepatitis B core (antigen) or to have elevated alanine aminotransferase levels than units that were CUE- (p < 0.001). The positive predictive value of CUE (the percentage of CUE+ units that were confirmed seropositive for any marker) was 3.5 percent, and the sensitivity of CUE (the percentage of confirmed-seropositive units that were CUE+) was 2.3 percent. CONCLUSION: The current CUE process has low sensitivity and apparently low positive predictive value, and in many cases, it appeared that donors misunderstood it. Yet, CUE was not a "random process," as CUE+ units were more likely to be seropositive for any infectious disease marker than CUE- units. This suggests that efforts to improve the CUE system may be warranted. As risk factors for transfusion-transmitted infection become more difficult to identify by history-based screening, however, such efforts may have limited effect.

Relationship between antibody to hepatitis B core antigen and retroviral infections in blood from volunteer donors.

BACKGROUND: The value of the test for antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc) as a surrogate screening assay in the time before sensitive, virus-specific screening tests were available has been well established. There is significant debate, however about the residual value of anti-HBc screening after the implementation of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-, human T-lymphotrophic virus (HTLV)-, and hepatitis C virus (HCV)-specific assays and, in particular, about its utility as a lifestyle marker to identify persons at risk for retrovirus infections. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Screening tests for antibodies to HIV, HTLV, and HBc, as well as confirmatory or supplemental test results for anti-HIV and anti-HTLV, were obtained from approximately 2.8 million donations collected from 1991 through 1993 by five blood centers within the United States. The sensitivity, positive predictive value, and relative prevalence of anti-HBc for each retrovirus were calculated and compared among demographic subgroups. RESULTS: The overall relationship between anti-HBc and anti-HIV was similar to that between anti-HBc and anti-HTLV. When calculated from the measured endpoint of the prevalence of anti-HIV-positive and anti-HTLV-positive donations, the sensitivities were 31.1 and 26.2 percent, the positive predictive values were 0.18 and 0.21 percent, and the relative prevalences were 30.1 and 23.8, respectively. Among 27 anti-HIV-seroconverting donors and 9 anti-HTLV-seroconverting donors, the sensitivities were 7.4 percent (95% CI: 0.9-24.3%) and 0 percent (95% CI: 0.0-28.3%), respectively. It was estimated that for each HIV-infected window-period donation detected by anti-HBc, from 19,000 to 81,000 HIV-noninfected donations are discarded. Similarly, more than 33,000 HTLV-noninfected donations are likely to be discarded for each HTLV-infected donation detected by anti-HBc. CONCLUSION: Although anti-HBc-reactive donations are more likely to be seropositive for a retrovirus than are anti-HBc-nonreactive donations, the low positive predictive value limits the test's effectiveness. If the anti-HBc test is retained in the blood donor setting, efforts should be focused on reducing the number of false-positive results.