Mycoplasma pneumoniae infections, 11 countries in Europe and Israel, 2011 to 2016

Background: Mycoplasma pneumoniae is a leading cause of community-acquired pneumonia, with large epidemics previously described to occur every 4 to 7 years. Aim: To better understand the diagnostic methods used to detect M. pneumoniae; to better understand M. pneumoniae testing and surveillance in use; to identify epidemics; to determine detection number per age group, age demographics for positive detections, concurrence of epidemics and annual peaks across geographical areas; and to determine the effect of geographical location on the timing of epidemics. Methods: A questionnaire was sent in May 2016 to Mycoplasma experts with national or regional responsibility within the ESCMID Study Group for Mycoplasma and Chlamydia Infections in 17 countries across Europe and Israel, retrospectively requesting details on M. pneumoniae-positive samples from January 2011 to April 2016. The Moving Epidemic Method was used to determine epidemic periods and effect of country latitude across the countries for the five periods under investigation. Results: Representatives from 12 countries provided data on M. pneumoniae infections, accounting for 95,666 positive samples. Two laboratories initiated routine macrolide resistance testing since 2013. Between 2011 and 2016, three epidemics were identified: 2011/12, 2014/15 and 2015/16. The distribution of patient ages for M. pneumoniae-positive samples showed three patterns. During epidemic years, an association between country latitude and calendar week when epidemic periods began was noted. Conclusions: An association between epidemics and latitude was observed. Differences were noted in the age distribution of positive cases and detection methods used and practice. A lack of macrolide resistance monitoring was noted

SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiological study in healthcare workers and discordant results using seven different diagnostic methods

The aim of the study was to access the SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence in healthcare workers (HCWs) of a tertiary pediatric hospital after the first wave of the pandemic and to compare the results among seven commercially available antibody detection assays, including chemiluminescence (CMIA), electroluminescence (ECLIA), Epsilon nzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA), and rapid immunochromatography (RIC). SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection was performed in serum samples of 1216 HCWs, using a reference CMIA assay and 8/1216 (0.66%) were detected positive. Positive serum samples were further tested with other assays; however, only one sample was positive by all tests. The rest 7 cases were negative with ECLIA and ELISA and gave discordant results with RIC test. Six months later, new serum samples of seropositive HCWs were analyzed with the same 7 tests, with inconsistent results again. Identification of reliable SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests is important to determine the actual number of past infections, the duration of antibodies, and guide public health decisions