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

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

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

Risk factors for statin-associated rhabdomyolysis

PURPOSE: To identify and characterize risk factors for rhabdomyolysis in patients prescribed statin monotherapy or statin plus fibrate therapy. METHODS: A nested case-control study was conducted within a cohort of 252,460 new users of lipid-lowering medications across 11 geographically dispersed U.S. health plans. Twenty-one cases of rhabdomyolysis confirmed by medical record review were compared to 200 individually matched controls without rhabdomyolysis. A conditional logistic regression model was applied to evaluate the effects of age, gender, comorbidities, concurrent medication use, dosage, and duration of statin use on the development of rhabdomyolysis. RESULTS: Statin users 65 years of age and older have four times the risk of hospitalization for rhabdomyolysis than those under age 65 (odds ratio (OR) = 4.36, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.5,14.1). We also observed a joint effect of high statin dosage and renal disease (p = 0.022). When these two variables were added to the model with age, we obtained an OR of 5.73 for dosage (95%CI: 0.63, 52.6) and 6.26 for renal disease (95%CI: 0.46, 63.38). Although not statistically significant, we did observe a greater than twofold increase in risk for rhabdomyolysis among females (OR = 2.53, 95%CI: 0.91, 7.32). CONCLUSIONS: Findings of this study indicate that older age is a risk factor for rhabdomyolysis among statin users. Although the evidence is not as strong, high statin dosage, renal disease, and female gender may be additional risk factors. Patients at higher risk of developing rhabdomyolysis should be closely monitored for signs and symptoms of the disease

Health plan administrative databases can efficiently identify serious myopathy and rhabdomyolysis.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the positive predictive values (PPVs) of specific criteria based upon International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision (ICD-9-CM) codes documented in health plan administrative databases for identification of cases of serious myopathy and rhabdomyolysis. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a retrospective study among patients enrolled in 11 geographically dispersed managed care organizations. Cohorts of new users of specific statins and fibrates were identified by selecting patients with an initial dispensing of the drug during the period 1 January 1998 to 30 June 2001. Potential cases of serious myopathy or rhabdomyolysis were identified using specific criteria based upon ICD-9-CM codes suggesting a muscle disorder or acute renal failure. RESULTS: A total of 194 hospitalizations meeting the criteria for chart review selection were identified among 206,732 new users of statins and 15,485 new users of fibrates. Overall, 31 cases of serious, clinically important myopathy or rhabdomyolysis (18%) were confirmed through chart review. Of these, 26 (84%) had a claim including codes for myoglobinuria (ICD-9-CM 791.3) or other disorders of muscle, ligament, and fascia (ICD-9-CM 728.89). A PPV of 74% (26 of 35 patients meeting criteria) was found for a composite definition that included (1) a primary or secondary discharge code for myoglobinuria, (2) a primary code for other disorders of muscle, or (3) a secondary code for other disorders of muscle accompanied by a claim for a CK test within 7 days of hospitalization or a discharge code for acute renal failure. CONCLUSION: For rare adverse events such as serious myopathy or rhabdomyolysis, large population-based databases that include diagnosis and laboratory test claims data can facilitate epidemiologic research