Search

Background: Characterisation of human-associated viral communities is essential for epidemiological surveillance and to be able to anticipate new potential threats for blood transfusion safety. In high-resource countries, the risk of blood-borne agent transmission of well-known viruses (HBV, HCV, HIV and HTLV) is currently considered to be under control. However, other unknown or unsuspected viruses may be transmitted to recipients by blood-derived products. To investigate this, the virome of plasma from individuals at high risk for parenterally and sexually transmitted infections was analysed by high throughput sequencing (HTS)., Materials and Methods: Purified nucleic acids from two pools of 50 samples from recipients of multiple transfusions, and three pools containing seven plasma samples from either HBV-, HCV- or HIV-infected blood donors, were submitted to HTS., Results: Sequences from resident anelloviruses and HPgV were evidenced in all pools. HBV and HCV sequences were detected in pools containing 3.8×10(3) IU/mL of HBV-DNA and 1.7×10(5) IU/mL of HCV-RNA, respectively, whereas no HIV sequence was found in a pool of 150 copies/mL of HIV-RNA. This suggests a lack of sensitivity in HTS performance in detecting low levels of virus. In addition, this study identified other issues, including laboratory contaminants and the uncertainty of taxonomic assignment of short sequence. No sequence suggestive of a new viral species was identified., Discussion: This study did not identify any new blood-borne virus in high-risk individuals. However, rare and/or viruses present at very low titre could have escaped our protocol. Our results demonstrate the positive contribution of HTS in the detection of viral sequences in blood donations.

Background: Failures of blood screening due to low test quality or poor laboratory technique increase the risk of transfusion-transmitted infections. For this reason, the World Health Organization has recommended a quality control (QC) system for African blood centers., Study Design and Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional research assessment of test performance at 51 blood centers in 17 African countries. A blinded, standardized panel containing 25 samples positive for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) and negative controls was tested by the centers using their operational infectious disease testing consisting of rapid tests, enzyme immunoassays (EIAs), or antigen-antibody EIAs. Nucleic acid testing was not performed., Results: The overall performances of the 42 assays were the lowest for hepatitis B surface antigen (75.6% sensitivity, 94.5% specificity), then for HCV (80.0% sensitivity, 98.1% specificity) and for HIV (81.4% sensitivity, 99.6% specificity). Poor sensitivity was driven by the use of rapid tests, which had sensitivities of 47.4% for HBV, 63.7% for HCV, and 72.4% for HIV. From a blood screening point of view, 321 (5.6%) infected units would have been transfused due to false-negative results. Assuming that those that were missed by rapid tests (84%) would have been detected by EIAs, 270 viral contaminations (92 HIV, 65 HCV, and 113 HBV) would have been avoided., Conclusion: These results support the discontinuation of rapid tests and implementation of antigen-antibody EIAs whenever possible in Africa. This successful QC program highlights the need for promoting such periodic external quality assessment studies., (© 2012 American Association of Blood Banks.)

Background: Following World Health Organization recommendations that a quality control (QC) system be implemented in African blood centers, a pilot study of the performance of human immunodeficiency virus antibody (anti-HIV), hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and hepatitis C virus antibody (anti-HCV) testing by several Sub-Saharan African blood centers was initiated., Study Design and Methods: A reference laboratory sent a panel of 25 samples to six African blood center laboratories. The panel included eight negative samples; four anti-HIV-1–, one anti-HIV-2–, four anti-HCV–, and five HBsAg-positive samples; and three samples consisting of mixtures of two sera to mimic coinfections. Sensitivity, specificity, and overall quality (correct positive or negative status) scores were calculated., Results: From the 21 sets of results obtained (seven for each virus), eight were from rapid tests (two for HIV, three for HBV, and three for HCV) and 13 were from enzyme immunoassays (EIAs; all HIV EIAs were antigen/antibody combination assays). Overall assay sensitivity was 98% for HIV, 75% for HBV, and 88% for HCV; agreement between blood centers using the same assay was good. Sensitivity of rapid tests was notably poorer than EIAs, with overall sensitivity quality scores of 64.5% for rapid tests (20% for HBsAg rapid tests) compared to 100% for EIAs. The overall specificity quality scores were 98.3 and 94.5% for EIAs and rapid tests, respectively., Conclusions: This pilot QC study organized for blood centers of Sub-Saharan Africa showed the feasibility of the approach despite some logistic constraints. Although interlaboratory variability was small, the poor performance of rapid tests, especially for HBsAg, raises policy questions about their use as the only screening assay.