Impact of CMV PCR Blips in Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Background: Viral blips reflecting polymerase chain reaction (PCR) artefacts or transient low-level replication are well described in the human immunodeficiency virus setting. However, the epidemiology of such blips in transplant recipients screened for cytomegalovirus (CMV) with PCR remains uncertain and was investigated in a cohort of solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell recipients. // Methods: Eligible recipients had known donor/recipient CMV IgG serostatus, and 3 CMV PCRs ≥. The CMV PCR triplicates (3 consecutive CMV PCRs) were defined; the first CMV PCR was always negative, and the time between the second and third samples was 7 days ≤. A positive second but negative third sample represented a blip. Odds ratio (OR) for factors associated with a triplicate being a blip was estimated by binomial regression adjusted for repeated measurements. Whether blips affected the hazard ratio (HR) for subsequent CMV infection was determined with a Cox model. // Results: 851 recipients generated 3883 CMV PCR triplicates. The OR of a triplicate representing a blip decreased with increasing viral load of the second sample (vs 273 IU/mL; >273-910 IU/mL: odds ratio [OR], 0.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1-0.5; >910 IU/mL: OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02-0.2; P ≤ 0.0002) and increased with intermediary-/low-risk serostatus (vs high risk) (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.2-5.5; P = 0.01). Cumulative exposure to DNAemia in the CMV blips greater than 910 IU/mL indicated increased HR of subsequent CMV infection (HR, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.2-17.2; P = 0.02). // Conclusions: Cytomegalovirus blips are frequent; particularly when the viral load of the first positive PCR is < 910 IU/mL, and serostatus risk is intermediary/low. Accumulating blips suggest intermittent low-level replication. If blips are suspected, confirmation of ongoing replication before initiation of treatment is prudent

An Agreement of Antigen Tests on Oral Pharyngeal Swabs or Less Invasive Testing With Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction for Detecting SARS-CoV-2 in Adults: Protocol for a Prospective Nationwide Observational Study

BackgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has resulted in an unprecedented level of worldwide testing for epidemiologic and diagnostic purposes, and due to the extreme need for tests, the gold-standard Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) testing capacity has been unable to meet the overall worldwide testing demand. Consequently, although the current literature has shown the sensitivity of rapid antigen tests (RATs) to be inferior to RT-PCR, RATs have been implemented on a large scale without solid data on performance. ObjectiveThis study will compare analytical and clinical sensitivities and specificities of 50 lateral flow– or laboratory-based RATs and 3 strand invasion–based amplification (SIBA)-RT-PCR tests from 30 manufacturers to RT-PCR testing of samples obtained from the deep oropharynx. In addition, the study will compare sensitivities and specificities of the included RATs as well as RT-PCR on clinical samples obtained from the deep oropharynx, the anterior nasal cavity, saliva, the deep nasopharynx, and expired air to RT-PCR on deep oropharyngeal samples. MethodsIn the prospective part of the study, 200 individuals found SARS-CoV-2 positive and 200 individuals found SARS-CoV-2 negative by routine RT-PCR testing will be retested with each RAT, applying RT-PCR as the reference method. In the retrospective part of the study, 304 deep oropharyngeal cavity swabs divided into 4 groups based on RT-PCR quantification cycle (Cq) levels will be tested with each RAT. ResultsThe results will be reported in several papers with different aims. The first paper will report retrospective (analytical sensitivity, overall and stratified into different Cq range groups) and prospective (clinical sensitivity) data for RATs, with RT-PCR as the reference method. The second paper will report results for RAT based on anatomical sampling location. The third paper will compare different anatomical sampling locations by RT-PCR testing. The fourth paper will focus on RATs that rely on central laboratory testing. Tests from 4 different manufacturers will be compared for analytical performance data on retrospective deep oropharyngeal swab samples. The fifth paper will report the results of 4 RATs applied both as professional use and as self-tests. The last paper will report the results from 2 breath tests in the study. A comparison of sensitivity and specificity between RATs will be conducted using the McNemar test for paired samples and the chi-squared test for unpaired samples. Comparison of the positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) between RATs will be performed by the bootstrap test, and 95% CIs for sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV will be calculated as bootstrap CIs. ConclusionsThe study will compare the sensitivities of a large number of RATs for SARS-CoV-2 to with those of RT-PCR and will address whether lateral flow–based RATs differ significantly from laboratory-based RATs. The anatomical test locations for both RATs and RT-PCR will also be compared. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04913116; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04913116 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/3570

Development and dynamics of cytomegalovirus UL97 ganciclovir resistance mutations in transplant recipients detected by next-generation sequencing

BACKGROUND: (Val)ganciclovir resistance mutations in CMV UL97 (UL97-GCV-R) complicate anti-CMV therapy in recipients of solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplants, but comprehensive data on prevalence, emergence, and outcome are scarce. METHODS: Using next-generation sequencing (NGS; Illumina MiSeq platform), we analyzed UL97-GCV-R in patients with available plasma samples and refractory CMV replication/DNAemia (n = 87) containing viral loads ≥910 IU/mL. Twenty-one patients with CMV DNAemia resolving under antiviral therapy were analyzed as controls. Detected mutations were considered induced and of potential clinical significance if they increased by ≥10% compared with the first detected frequency or if they had a maximum frequency ≥25%. RESULTS: Nineteen of 87 (21.8%) with refractory CMV replication had ≥1 UL97-GCV-R detected by NGS, in comparison to 0/21 of the controls (P = .02). One-third of the recipients had 2 or more induced UL97-GCV-R mutations. The most frequently induced mutations affected codons 595 (42% [8/19]), 594 (32% [6/19]), and 603 (32% [6/19]). C592G was present in all episodes of both cases and controls at frequencies <15%, but never induced. UL97-GCV-R tended to be more frequent in donor/recipient CMV immunoglobulin G mismatch or following failure to complete primary prophylaxis, and many developed invasive CMV disease. CONCLUSIONS: UL97-GCV-R is common among transplant patients with refractory CMV replication. Early testing by NGS allows for identification of major mutations at codons 595, 594, and 603 and excludes a major role of C592G in ganciclovir resistance. Large prospective studies on UL97-GCV-R are warranted