Comparison of BinaxNOW and SARS-CoV-2 qRT-PCR detection of the omicron variant from matched anterior nares swabs

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased use of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs). In winter 2021 to 2022, the Omicron variant surge made it apparent that although RDTs are less sensitive than quantitative reverse transcription-PCR (qRT-PCR), the accessibility, ease of use, and rapid readouts made them a sought after and often sold-out item at local suppliers. Here, we sought to qualify the Abbott BinaxNOW RDT for use in our university testing program as a method to rule in positive or rule out negative individuals quickly at our priority qRT-PCR testing site. To perform this qualification study, we collected additional swabs from individuals attending this site. All swabs were tested using BinaxNOW. Initially as part of a feasibility study, test period 1 (n = 110) samples were stored cold before testing. In test period 2 (n = 209), samples were tested immediately. Combined, 102/319 samples tested severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive via qRT-PCR. All sequenced samples were Omicron (n = 92). We calculated 53.9% sensitivity, 100% specificity, a 100% positive predictive value, and an 82.2% negative predictive value for BinaxNOW (n = 319). Sensitivity would be improved (75.3%) by changing the qRT-PCR positivity threshold from a threshold cycle (CT) value of 40 to a CT value of 30. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve shows that for qRT-PCR-positive CT values of between 24 and 40, the BinaxNOW test is of limited value diagnostically. Results suggest BinaxNOW could be used in our setting to confirm SARS-CoV-2 infection in individuals with substantial viral load, but a significant fraction of infected individuals would be missed if we used RDTs exclusively to rule out infection. IMPORTANCE Our results suggest BinaxNOW can rule in SARS-CoV-2 infection but would miss infections if RDTs were exclusively used.Boston UniversityPublished versio

Mechanistic biomarkers provide early and sensitive detection of acetaminophen-induced acute liver injury at first presentation to hospital

Acetaminophen overdose is a common reason for hospital admission and the most frequent cause of hepatotoxicity in the Western world. Early identification would facilitate patient-individualized treatment strategies. We investigated the potential of a panel of novel biomarkers (with enhanced liver expression or linked to the mechanisms of toxicity) to identify patients with acetaminophen-induced acute liver injury (ALI) at first presentation to the hospital when currently used markers are within the normal range. In the first hospital presentation plasma sample from patients (n = 129), we measured microRNA-122 (miR-122; high liver specificity), high mobility group box-1 (HMGB1; marker of necrosis), full-length and caspase-cleaved keratin-18 (K18; markers of necrosis and apoptosis), and glutamate dehydrogenase (GLDH; marker of mitochondrial dysfunction). Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis and positive/negative predictive values were used to compare sensitivity to report liver injury versus alanine transaminase (ALT) and International Normalized Ratio (INR). In all patients, biomarkers at first presentation significantly correlated with peak ALT or INR. In patients presenting with normal ALT or INR, miR-122, HMGB1, and necrosis K18 identified the development of liver injury (n = 15) or not (n = 84) with a high degree of accuracy and significantly outperformed ALT, INR, and plasma acetaminophen concentration for the prediction of subsequent ALI (n = 11) compared with no ALI (n = 52) in patients presenting within 8 hours of overdose. Conclusion: Elevations in plasma miR-122, HMGB1, and necrosis K18 identified subsequent ALI development in patients on admission to the hospital, soon after acetaminophen overdose, and in patients with ALTs in the normal range. The application of such a biomarker panel could improve the speed of clinical decision-making, both in the treatment of ALI and the design/execution of patient-individualized treatment strategies

Buildout and integration of an automated high-throughput CLIA laboratory for SARS-CoV-2 testing on a large urban campus

In 2019, the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 were detected in Wuhan, China, and by early 2020 the first cases were identified in the United States. SARS-CoV-2 infections increased in the US causing many states to implement stay-at-home orders and additional safety precautions to mitigate potential outbreaks. As policies changed throughout the pandemic and restrictions lifted, there was an increase in demand for COVID-19 testing which was costly, difficult to obtain, or had long turn-around times. Some academic institutions, including Boston University (BU), created an on-campus COVID-19 screening protocol as part of a plan for the safe return of students, faculty, and staff to campus with the option for in-person classes. At BU, we put together an automated high-throughput clinical testing laboratory with the capacity to run 45,000 individual tests weekly by Fall of 2020, with a purpose-built clinical testing laboratory, a multiplexed reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) test, robotic instrumentation, and trained staff. There were many challenges including supply chain issues for personal protective equipment and testing materials in addition to equipment that were in high demand. The BU Clinical Testing Laboratory (CTL) was operational at the start of Fall 2020 and performed over 1 million SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests during the 2020-2021 academic year.Boston UniversityPublished versio

Adjunctive rifampicin for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (ARREST): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18-45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference -1·4%, 95% CI -7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68-1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3-4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005). INTERPRETATION: Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment

Teaching children and adolescents with special needs

xiv, 473 p. : il.; 26 cm

Pinning Our Hopes on the Future

We ask students to care for their clients and to commit to professional, accountable and ethical practice. We teach them about nursing theories and encourage them to continue to move nursing forward for the benefit of practitioners and the people for whom they provide care. It seems logical then that we would make a commitment to care for and nurture students during their time with us. Yet we were struck by what this simple ceremony meant to all who attended, by the pride in the voices of students and faculty as they recited the declaration, and by the enthusiasm of our Gold Medal graduate, who restated our profession\u27s unwavering commitment to providing safe, ethical and respectful nursing care

Mechanistic biomarkers provide early and sensitive detection of paracetamol-induced acute liver injury at first presentation to hospital

Background and Aims: Paracetamol overdose is a common reason for admission to hospital and the most frequent cause of acute liver failure in the western world. Early identification of liver injury would facilitate patient risk stratification. We investigated the potential of novel biomarkers - which demonstrate either enhanced liver expression or have been linked to the mechanism of toxicity - to identify patients with paracetamol-induced acute liver injury at first presentation to hospital when current liver injury markers are still normal. Methods: In plasma samples taken from patients at first presentation to hospital following paracetamol overdose, we measured the following biomarkers: microRNA-122 (miR-122; high liver specificity), High Mobility Group Box-1 (HMGB1; marker of necrosis), full length and caspase-cleaved Keratin-18 (K18; markers of necrosis and apoptosis, respectively) and glutamate dehydrogenase (GLDH; marker of mitochondrial dysfunction). Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to compare the sensitivity of each marker to report liver injury versus standard liver function test parameters. Results: In all patients (n = 129); the biomarkers (miR-122, HMGB1, necrosis K18, apoptosis K18 and GLDH) at first presentation all correlated with peak hospital stay ALT/INR (all p < 0.0001). In patients with normal ALT/INR at presentation, miR-122, HMGB1 and necrosis K18 identified the development of liver injury (n = 15) or not (n = 84) with a high degree of accuracy (miR-122, HMGB1 and necrosis K-18: ROC curve AUC values (sensitivity at 90% specificity); 0.93 (0.83), 0.97 (0.91) and 0.94 (0.90), respectively. All p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Elevations in plasma miR-122, HMGB1, and necrosis keratin-18 identify subsequent development of acute liver injury in patients on admission to hospital, soon after paracetamol overdose, and in patients with ALTs in the normal range. The clinical development of such a biomarker panel could improve the speed of clinical decision-making, both in the treatment of acute liver injury and in the design and execution of clinical trials for new treatment strategies that aim to refine the management of this common hepatotoxin

Incidence of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis in patients treated with lipid-lowering drugs.

CONTEXT: Lipid-lowering agents are widely prescribed in the United States. Reliable estimates of rhabdomyolysis risk with various lipid-lowering agents are not available. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence of rhabdomyolysis in patients treated with different statins and fibrates, alone and in combination, in the ambulatory setting. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Drug-specific inception cohorts of statin and fibrate users were established using claims data from 11 managed care health plans across the United States. Patients with at least 180 days of prior health plan enrollment were entered into the cohorts between January 1, 1998, and June 30, 2001. Person-time was classified as monotherapy or combined statin-fibrate therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Incidence rates of rhabdomyolysis per 10,000 person-years of treatment, number needed to treat, and relative risk of rhabdomyolysis. RESULTS: In 252,460 patients treated with lipid-lowering agents, 24 cases of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis occurred during treatment. Average incidence per 10,000 person-years for monotherapy with atorvastatin, pravastatin, or simvastatin was 0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20-0.84); for cerivastatin, 5.34 (95% CI, 1.46-13.68); and for fibrate, 2.82 (95% CI, 0.58-8.24). By comparison, the incidence during unexposed person-time was 0 (95% CI, 0-0.48; P = .056). The incidence increased to 5.98 (95% CI, 0.72-216.0) for combined therapy of atorvastatin, pravastatin, or simvastatin with a fibrate, and to 1035 (95% CI, 389-2117) for combined cerivastatin-fibrate use. Per year of therapy, the number needed to treat to observe 1 case of rhabdomyolysis was 22,727 for statin monotherapy, 484 for older patients with diabetes mellitus who were treated with both a statin and fibrate, and ranged from 9.7 to 12.7 for patients who were treated with cerivastatin plus fibrate. CONCLUSIONS: Rhabdomyolysis risk was similar and low for monotherapy with atorvastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin; combined statin-fibrate use increased risk, especially in older patients with diabetes mellitus. Cerivastatin combined with fibrate conferred a risk of approximately 1 in 10 treated patients per year