Specific detection of Salmonella enterica and Escherichia coli strains by using ELISA with bacteriophages as recognition agents

The use of bacteriophages, instead of antibodies, in the ELISA-based detection of bacterial strains was tested. This procedure appeared to be efficient, and specific strains of Salmonella enterica and Escherichia coli could be detected. The sensitivity of the assay was about 105 bacterial cells/well (106/ml), which is comparable with or outperforms other ELISA tests detecting intact bacterial cells without an enrichment step. The specificity of the assay depends on the kind of bacteriophage used. We conclude that the use of bacteriophages in the detection and identification of bacteria by an ELISA-based method can be an alternative to the use of specific antibodies. The advantages of the use of bacteriophages are their environmental abundance (and, thus, a possibility to isolate various phages with different specificities) and the availability of methods for obtaining large amounts of phage lysates, which are simple, rapid, cheap, and easy

Impact of COVID-19 on cardiovascular testing in the United States versus the rest of the world

Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-US institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States. Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis. Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection

The joint IAEA, EANM, and SNMMI practical guidance on peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRNT) in neuroendocrine tumours

Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRNT) is a molecularly targeted radiation therapy involving the systemic administration of a radiolabelled peptide designed to target with high affinity and specificity receptors overexpressed on tumours. PRRNT employing the radiotagged somatostatin receptor agonists (90)Y-DOTATOC ([(90)Y-DOTA(0),Tyr(3)]-octreotide) or (177)Lu-DOTATATE ([(177)Lu-DOTA(0),Tyr(3),Thr(8)]-octreotide or [(177)Lu-DOTA(0),Tyr(3)]-octreotate) have been successfully used for the past 15 years to target metastatic or inoperable neuroendocrine tumours expressing the somatostatin receptor subtype 2. Accumulated evidence from clinical experience indicates that these tumours can be subjected to a high absorbed dose which leads to partial or complete objective responses in up to 30 % of treated patients. Survival analyses indicate that patients presenting with high tumour receptor expression at study entry and receiving (177)Lu-DOTATATE or (90)Y-DOTATOC treatment show significantly higher objective responses, leading to longer survival and improved quality of life. Side effects of PRRNT are typically seen in the kidneys and bone marrow. These, however, are usually mild provided adequate protective measures are undertaken. Despite the large body of evidence regarding efficacy and clinical safety, PRRNT is still considered an investigational treatment and its implementation must comply with national legislation, and ethical guidelines concerning human therapeutic investigations. This guidance was formulated based on recent literature and leading experts’ opinions. It covers the rationale, indications and contraindications for PRRNT, assessment of treatment response and patient follow-up. This document is aimed at guiding nuclear medicine specialists in selecting likely candidates to receive PRRNT and to deliver the treatment in a safe and effective manner. This document is largely based on the book published through a joint international effort under the auspices of the Nuclear Medicine Section of the International Atomic Energy Agency

European Association of Nuclear Medicine Focus 5: Consensus on Molecular Imaging and Theranostics in Prostate Cancer.

Background: In prostate cancer (PCa), questions remain on indications for prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging and PSMA radioligand therapy, integration of advanced imaging in nomogram-based decision-making, dosimetry, and development of new theranostic applications. Objective: We aimed to critically review developments in molecular hybrid imaging and systemic radioligand therapy, to reach a multidisciplinary consensus on the current state of the art in PCa. Design, setting, and participants: The results of a systematic literature search informed a two-round Delphi process with a panel of 28 PCa experts in medical or radiation oncology, urology, radiology, medical physics, and nuclear medicine. The results were discussed and ratified in a consensus meeting. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Forty-eight statements were scored on a Likert agreement scale and six as ranking options. Agreement statements were analysed using the RAND appropriateness method. Ranking statements were analysed using weighted summed scores. Results and limitations: After two Delphi rounds, there was consensus on 42/48 (87.5%) of the statements. The expert panel recommends PSMA PET to be used for staging the majority of patients with unfavourable intermediate and high risk, and for restaging of suspected recurrent PCa. There was consensus that oligometastatic disease should be defined as up to five metastases, even using advanced imaging modalities. The group agreed that [177Lu]Lu-PSMA should not be administered only after progression to cabazitaxel and that [223Ra]RaCl2 remains a valid therapeutic option in bone-only metastatic castration-resistant PCa. Uncertainty remains on various topics, including the need for concordant findings on both [18F]FDG and PSMA PET prior to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA therapy. Conclusions: There was a high proportion of agreement among a panel of experts on the use of molecular imaging and theranostics in PCa. Although consensus statements cannot replace high-certainty evidence, these can aid in the interpretation and dissemination of best practice from centres of excellence to the wider clinical community. Patient summary: There are situations when dealing with prostate cancer (PCa) where both the doctors who diagnose and track the disease development and response to treatment, and those who give treatments are unsure about what the best course of action is. Examples include what methods they should use to obtain images of the cancer and what to do when the cancer has returned or spread. We reviewed published research studies and provided a summary to a panel of experts in imaging and treating PCa. We also used the research summary to develop a questionnaire whereby we asked the experts to state whether or not they agreed with a list of statements. We used these results to provide guidance to other health care professionals on how best to image men with PCa and what treatments to give, when, and in what order, based on the information the images provide