Search

Antigen-specific CD4 and CD8 T cells are important components of the immune response to Mycobacterium tuberculosis, yet little information is currently known regarding how the breadth, specificity, phenotype, and function of M. tuberculosis-specific T cells correlate with M. tuberculosis infection outcome in humans. To facilitate evaluation of human M. tuberculosis-specific T cell responses targeting multiple different Ags, we sought to develop a high throughput and reproducible T cell response spectrum assay requiring low blood sample volumes. We describe here the optimization and standardization of a microtiter plate-based, diluted whole blood stimulation assay utilizing overlapping peptide pools corresponding to a functionally diverse panel of 60 M. tuberculosis Ags. Using IFN-γ production as a readout of Ag specificity, the assay can be conducted using 50 μl of blood per test condition and can be expanded to accommodate additional Ags. We evaluated the intra- and interassay variability, and implemented testing of the assay in diverse cohorts of M. tuberculosis-unexposed healthy adults, foreign-born adults with latent M. tuberculosis infection residing in the United States, and tuberculosis household contacts with latent M. tuberculosis infection in a tuberculosis-endemic setting in Kenya. The M. tuberculosis-specific T cell response spectrum assay further enhances the immunological toolkit available for evaluating M. tuberculosis-specific T cell responses across different states of M. tuberculosis infection, and can be readily implemented in resource-limited settings. Moreover, application of the assay to longitudinal cohorts will facilitate evaluation of treatment- or vaccine-induced changes in the breadth and specificity of Ag-specific T cell responses, as well as identification of M. tuberculosis-specific T cell responses associated with M. tuberculosis infection outcomes.

Background. International travel poses a risk of destination-specific illness and may contribute to the global spread of infectious diseases. Despite this, little is known about the health characteristics and pretravel healthcare of US international travelers, particularly those at higher risk of travel-associated illness. Methods. We formed a national consortium (Global TravEpiNet) of 18 US clinics registered to administer yellow fever vaccination. We collected data regarding demographic and health characteristics, destinations, purpose of travel, and pretravel healthcare from 13 235 international travelers who sought pretravel consultation at these sites from January 2009 through January 2011. Results. The destinations and itineraries of Global TravEpiNet travelers differed from those of the overall population of US international travelers. The majority of Global TravEpiNet travelers were visiting low- or lower-middle-income countries, and Africa was the most frequently visited region. Seventy-five percent of travelerswere visitingmalaria-endemic countries, and 38% were visiting countries endemic for yellow fever. Fifty-nine percent of travelers reported ≤1 medical condition. Atovaquone/proguanil was the most commonly prescribed antimalarial drug, and most travelers received an antibiotic for self-treatment of travelers' diarrhea. HepatitisA and typhoid were themost frequently administered vaccines. Conclusions. Data from Global TravEpiNet provide insight into the characteristics and pretravel healthcare of US international travelers who are at increased risk of travel-associated illness due to itinerary, purpose of travel, or existing medical conditions. Improved understanding of this epidemiologically significant population may help target risk-reduction strategies and interventions to limit the spread of infections related to global travel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rifampin-resistant tuberculosis is a leading cause of morbidity worldwide; only one-third of persons start treatment, and outcomes are often inadequate. Several trials demonstrate 90% efficacy using an all-oral, 6-month regimen of bedaquiline, pretomanid, and linezolid (BPaL), but significant toxicity occurred using 1200-mg linezolid. After US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2019, some US clinicians rapidly implemented BPaL using an initial 600-mg linezolid dose adjusted by serum drug concentrations and clinical monitoring., Methods: Data from US patients treated with BPaL between 14 October 2019 and 30 April 2022 were compiled and analyzed by the BPaL Implementation Group (BIG), including baseline examination and laboratory, electrocardiographic, and clinical monitoring throughout treatment and follow-up. Linezolid dosing and clinical management was provider driven, and most patients had linezolid adjusted by therapeutic drug monitoring., Results: Of 70 patients starting BPaL, 2 changed to rifampin-based therapy, 68 (97.1%) completed BPaL, and 2 of the 68 (2.9%) experienced relapse after completion. Using an initial 600-mg linezolid dose daily adjusted by therapeutic drug monitoring and careful clinical and laboratory monitoring for adverse effects, supportive care, and expert consultation throughout BPaL treatment, 3 patients (4.4%) with hematologic toxicity and 4 (5.9%) with neurotoxicity required a change in linezolid dose or frequency. The median BPaL duration was 6 months., Conclusions: BPaL has transformed treatment for rifampin-resistant or intolerant tuberculosis. In this cohort, effective treatment required less than half the duration recommended in 2019 US guidelines for drug-resistant tuberculosis. Use of individualized linezolid dosing and monitoring likely enhanced safety and treatment completion. The BIG cohort demonstrates that early implementation of new tuberculosis treatments in the United States is feasible., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. C. A. H. reports honoraria from the Infectious Diseases Society of America for an IDWeek 2022 presentation, travel support from the University of Employer, and Pfizer stock ownership. M. C. S. reports grants from the National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities (R21MD017943-01; Neighborhood transportation vulnerability and geographic patterns of diabetes-related limb loss) and the American Diabetes Association (Diabetic Ulcer Computational Sensing System), paid to the institution, and payment from the Society for Advancement in Wound Care for speaking at the 2023 spring meeting. D. A. reports a grant from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as the primary investigator of TB Centers of Excellence, travel support from the CDC, and participation in the CDC's Tuberculosis Trials Consortium data and safety monitoring board. L. C. reports grants from USAID (federal award to institution for global research capacity building) and the California Department of Public Health (training award to institution for pandemic response); an unpaid position as president of the Executive Leadership Board for the North American Region Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases; and an unpaid position on the coordinating board of STOP TB USA. M. B. D reports institutional contracts with the CDC and Westat. A. V. E. reports travel support for meetings from the CDC. K. A. R. reports grants and travel support from the CDC’s Division of TB Elimination and a position as the liaison for the National Association of County and City Health Officials to the Advisory Committee for the Elimination of Tuberculosis. M. C. R. reports travel support for meeting from Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL) and positions as chair of the APHL Infectious Diseases Committee and member of the APHL Tuberculosis Subcommittee and the College of American Pathologists Microbiology Committee. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: People who travel to areas with high rabies endemicity and have animal contact are at increased risk for rabies exposure. We examined characteristics of international travelers queried regarding rabies vaccination during pretravel consultations at Global TravEpiNet (GTEN) practices during 2009-2010., Material and Methods: We performed bivariate and multivariable analyses of data collected from 18 GTEN clinics. Travel destinations were classified by strength level of rabies vaccination recommendation., Results: Of 13,235 travelers, 226 (2%) reported previous rabies vaccination, and 406 (3%) received rabies vaccine at the consultation. Common travel purposes for these 406 travelers were leisure (26%), research/education (17%), and nonmedical service work (14%). Excluding the 226 who were previously vaccinated, 8070 (62%) of 13,009 travelers intended to visit one or more countries with a strong recommendation for rabies vaccination; 1675 (21%) of these 8070 intended to travel for 1 month or more. Among these 1675 travelers, 145 (9%) were vaccinated, 498 (30%) declined vaccination, 832 (50%) had itineraries that clinicians determined did not indicate vaccination, and 200 (12%) remained unvaccinated for other reasons. In both bivariate and multivariate analyses, travelers with trip durations >6 months versus 1-3 months (adjusted odds ratio [OR]=4.9 [95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1, 11.4]) and those traveling for "research/education" or to "provide medical care" (adjusted OR=5.1 [95% CI 1.9, 13.7] and 9.5 [95% CI 2.2, 40.8], respectively), compared with leisure travelers, were more likely to receive rabies vaccination., Conclusions: Few travelers at GTEN clinics received rabies vaccine, although many planned trips 1 month long or more to a strong-recommendation country. Clinicians often determined that vaccine was not indicated, and travelers often declined vaccine when it was offered. The decision to vaccinate should take into account the strength of the vaccine recommendation at the destination country, duration of stay, availability of postexposure prophylaxis, potential for exposure to animals, and likelihood of recurrent travel to high-risk destinations.