Altona RealStar Research Articles

A-304 A RT-PCR Assay for Detection and Quantification of Hepatitis D Virus (HDV)

Abstract Background Hepatitis D virus (HDV), also called Delta Hepatitis, is associated with the presence of the Hepatitis B virus (HBV) and is responsible for the infection and inflammation of liver cells. It is estimated that 15–20 million people worldwide are affected by HDV. In Brazil, Hepatitis D has high prevalence rates in the Amazon Basin. HDV is an enveloped virus with a 36 nm average diameter. The HDV virion involves a negative-sense, single-stranded circular RNA molecule associated with an inner-core delta antigen surrounded by envelope glycoproteins. HDV-infected individuals may not show signs or symptoms of the disease. When present, the most common are: tiredness, dizziness, nausea and/or vomiting, fever, abdominal pain, and yellow skin/eyes. Chronic Hepatitis D is considered the most severe form of chronic viral hepatitis, with more rapid progression to cirrhosis and an increased risk for decompensation, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and death. Molecularly, determining the concentration of virus circulating in the blood of HDV patients is extremely important for diagnosis. The Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR) is a molecular technique capable of detecting the viral genome with high sensitivity and specificity, ensuring the safety of the result. Therefore, this study aims to describe the analytical validation of a one-step RT-qPCR assay for HDV detection. Methods Assay performance was evaluated using commercial quantified positive control to HDV (1000, 100, 10, 1, and 0.5 IU/µL), and the parameters of analysis included: standardization assays, efficiency, and detection limit. For specificity evaluation, positive samples for Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV), Herpes Simplex Virus (HSV), Cytomegalovirus (CMV), Hepatitis B Virus (HBV), and Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) were used. RNA isolation was performed with the MagNA Pure 24 Total NA Isolation Kit at the automated platform MagNA Pure 24 System (Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland), according to the manufacturer's instructions. Altona RealStar HDV RT-PCR Kit 1.0 (Altona Diagnostics, Hamburg, Germany) was used to directly amplify RNA samples on the qPCR instrument, according to the manufacturer's instructions. Results The standardization assays indicated good qPCR amplification curves and high fluorescence levels between the controls evaluated. The assay demonstrated an average efficiency of 95%, with a coefficient of determination (r2) of 0.99. The detection limit of the test was 1 IU/µL for the HDV target (95% confidence interval). No cross-reactions with closely related viruses were observed (15 HDV-negative human plasma samples), indicating 100% specificity. The experiments performed to evaluate the precision demonstrated optimal repeatability and reproducibility. Conclusion The HDV diagnostic is required to ensure sensitive, specific and accurate identification of the viral agent and thus prompt surveillance actions such as epidemiological monitoring and control measures of infection. The RT-qPCR assay described here provides a reliable, highly specific, and sensitive method for the detection and quantification of HDV. Nevertheless, the assay needs to be evaluated in conjunction with a clinical and epidemiological context.

Evaluation of an automated system for the quantitation of human Herpesvirus-6 DNA from clinical specimens

BackgroundQuantitation of human herpesvirus-6 (HHV-6) DNA in clinical specimens is important for the diagnosis and management of HHV-6-associated infection and reactivation in immunocompromised patients, particularly transplant recipients. MethodsThe analytical performance of the Altona RealStar ASR HHV-6 qPCR on the semi-automated AltoStar AM16 system was assessed using HHV-6 reference material in plasma and cerebral spinal fluid (CSF). Qualitative and quantitative agreement was determined using 123 clinical EDTA plasma specimens tested using a laboratory-developed HHV-6 qPCR. ResultsThe 95% Lower Limit of Detection was 20 IU/mL [95% confidence interval (CI): 10 to 29] in plasma and 78 IU/mL (95% CI: 55 to 146) in CSF. The assay was linear from 7.0 to 2.0 log10 IU/mL in both matrices. Overall agreement of the RealStar ASR HHV-6 qPCR on the AltoStar AM16 with a laboratory-developed test was 95.9% (95% CI: 90.8 to 98.7). Passing-Bablok analysis of specimens quantifiable by both methods and at levels >1000 copies/mL revealed a regression line of Y = 1.00*X–0.20, with neither systematic (95% CI Y-intercept: −0.66 to 0.26) nor proportional (95% CI slope: 0.89 to 1.10) bias compared to the reference. ConclusionsThe RealStar ASR HHV-6 qPCR on the AltoStar AM16 provides accurate quantitation for clinical monitoring of HHV-6 in immunocompromised hosts.

Performance Evaluation of the Fully Automated NeuMoDx RT-PCR Platform for the Quantification of CMV and EBV DNA in EDTA Plasma: Implications for Clinical Management and Establishment of a Conversion Formula.

The NeuMoDx96 platform is a fully automated real-time PCR (RT-PCR) system. To provide continued testing quality with the introduction of new assays, the primary aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical and clinical performance of the NeuMoDx platform for the detection and quantification of CMV and EBV DNA in EDTA plasma. As no conversion from log10 international units per milliliter to copies per milliliter was provided, the secondary aim was to calculate and establish a conversion factor for the output of results in copies per milliliter for CMV and EBV. Archived ETDA plasma samples (cytomegalovirus [CMV], n = 290; Ebstein-Barr virus [EBV], n = 254) were used to evaluate the analytical performance of the NeuMoDx96 platform against the routine real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays. Additionally, the first WHO international standards (WHO-IS) for CMV (n = 70) and EBV (n = 72) were used for the calculation of the intra- and interassay variation. WHO-IS qualitative agreement between the assays was 100%. Intra-assay variability was low for both CMV assays (coefficient of variation [CV], phosphate-buffered saline [PBS], 3 log10 IU/mL NeuMoDx, 3.67%; Abbott RealTime, CMV, 3.35%) and NeuMoDx EBV assay (CV, PBS, 3 log10 IU/mL, 3.05%) but high for the Altona EBV assay (CV, PBS, 3 log10 IU/mL, 26.13%). The overall qualitative concordance in clinical samples was 96.8% (270/279) for CMV and 96.7% (237/245) for EBV. The mean difference between the assays was -0.2 log10 IU/mL (CMV) and -0.18 log10 IU/mL (EBV). High qualitative concordance and a significant correlation of quantitative values for both assays make NeuMoDx CMV and EBV assays suitable for routine diagnostic testing. The new RT-PCR system and conversion formulas to report results in copies per milliliter are now applied in clinical routine testing. IMPORTANCE Clinical management of solid organ transplant (SOT) patients requires the careful monitoring of immunosuppression and viral infection or reactivation. qPCR is the gold standard for the detection and quantification of very small amounts of viral DNA and allows for an early assessment of viral load kinetics. The tested NeuMoDx 96 platform provides faster results than the previously used RT-PCR workflows for CMV (Abbott m2000 and RealTime CMV assay) and EBV (LightCycler 480 II, Roche high pure extraction, and Altona RealStar EBV assay) DNA detection. The implemented conversion formulas allow the continued reporting in clinically established copies per milliliter, important for long-term care of SOT patients.

Use of RT-PCR thermocycling program for the quantification of DNA viruses in a single run with RNA viruses: Example of Altona RealStar® HSV or VZV PCR kits

Real-time PCR plays a key role in the diagnosis of viral infections. Multiple kits can detect or quantify genomes of various viruses with the same thermocycling program. Detection of RNA viruses includes an additional step of reverse transcription and challenge their detection in a single run with DNA viruses.We investigated the analytical performance of HSV-1, HSV-2 and VZV DNA quantification with Altona RealStar® PCR kits using the RT-PCR program for RNA viruses instead of the PCR program for DNA viruses. For each three viruses, Bland-Altman distribution did not show differences between both programs, and quantification curves generated with both thermocycling programs confirmed high correlation (R2 ≥ 0.9983). Detection of low viral load samples was evaluated, on 10-times repeat-test. All replicate samples were detected with both thermocycling programs and were quantified at similar viral loads (bias in log10 copies/mL: +0.05 (HSV-1), −0.01 (HSV-2) and +0.25 (VZV)). This confirms the feasibility of using the RT-PCR thermocycling program to detect and quantify the genome of RNA and DNA viruses in a single run.

Potential pitfalls in analysing a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay and how to standardise data interpretation

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in December 2019 lead to the rapid implementation of assays for virus detection, with real-time RT-PCR arguably considered the gold-standard. In our laboratory Altona RealStar SARS-Cov-2 RT-PCR kits are used with Applied Biosystems QuantStudio 7 Flex thermocyclers. Real-time PCR data interpretation is potentially complex and time-consuming, particularly for SARS-CoV-2, where the laboratory handles up to 2000 samples each day. To simplify this, an automated system that rapidly interprets the curves, developed by diagnostics.ai was introduced. QuantStudio software provides two methods for interpretation, relative threshold and baseline threshold. Many of our assays are analysed using relative threshold and directly exported into pcr.ai software, however, in some rare cases the QuantStudio software assigns positive results to ‘ambiguous’ curves, flagged by pcr.ai, requiring manual intervention. Due to the sample numbers processed and the proportionate increase in curves flagged by pcr.ai, the two methods were investigated. An audit was carried out to determine the frequency of these curves, involving 138 samples tested during November 2020, including 97 serial samples from 38 patients and it was determined that the relative threshold method produced unreliable results in many of these cases. In addition, we present a solution to simplify the interpretation and automate the process.

Can In-house HIV-2 Viral Load Assay be a Reliable Alternative to Commercial Assays for Clinical and Therapeutic Monitoring?

Currently, there is a global contemplation to end the AIDS epidemic by 2030. HIV-2 poses unique challenges to this end. The burden of HIV-2 is higher in resource-limited countries, and it is intrinsically resistant to NNRTI drugs. In addition, there is no FDA-approved plasma viral load assay to monitor disease progression and therapeutic efficacy. To overcome these challenges, we have developed and evaluated an in-house quantitative HIV-2 viral load assay. Blood samples were collected from 28 HIV-2 treatment-naïve monoinfected individuals and tested using an in-house qPCR HIV-2 viral load assay. The extracted RNA was amplified using Quantifast pathogen + IC kit. The in-house qPCR has a limit of detection of 695 copies/ml. The intra- and inter-assay variation (% CV) of the assay was 0.61 and 0.95, respectively. The in-house assay quantified HIV-2 NIBSC accurately (1000 IU) with a mean of 1952 copies/mL. Among the 28 samples tested by in-house qPCR assay, 11 (39.2%) samples were quantified, whereas 17 (60.7%) samples were not detected. In comparison with Altona RealStar HIV-2 RT PCR and Exavir Load RT assay, the results were 96.4% and 69.6% concordant, respectively. No significant (p = 0.99 and p = 0.13) difference in quantifying viral load between the three assays. Based on clinical and immunological (CD4) staging, the performance characteristics were comparable. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first in-house qPCR developed in India. The performance characteristics of the in-house assay are comparable to the commercial assays, and they can be used assertively to monitor HIV-2 patients.

Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics and risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection in Zambia

ObjectivesTo conduct a diagnostic validation study of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic kits. MethodsWe compared SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test results from 3 RT-PCR assays used by the Zambian government between November 2020 and February 2021 (Panther Fusion assay, Da An Gene's 2019-nCoV RNA kit and Maccura's PCR Kit) with the Altona RealStar RT-PCR kit which served as the gold standard. We also evaluated results from rapid antigen testing and whether comorbidities were linked with increased odds of infection. ResultsWe recruited 244 participants, 61% (149/244) were positive by at least 1 PCR assay. Da An Gene, Maccura, and Panther Fusion assays had sensitivities of 0.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0%–41%), 27.1% (95% CI 15%–42%), and 76% (95% CI 65%–85%), respectively, but specificity was low (<85% for all 3 assays). HIV and TB were not associated with SARS-CoV-2, whereas female sex (OR 0.5 [0.3–0.9], p = 0.026) and chronic pulmonary disease (0.1 [0.0–0.8], p = 0.031) were associated with lower odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of 44 samples, 84% sequenced were Beta variant. ConclusionsThe RT-PCR assays evaluated did not meet WHO recommended minimum sensitivity of 80%. Local diagnostic validation studies should be embedded within preparedness plans for future outbreaks to improve the public health response.

Performance of six SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection systems in symptomatic and asymptomatic pediatric and maternal patients.

Aim: This study evaluated the real-world performance of six test systems for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in 138 pediatric and 110 adult maternal patients. Materials & methods: Nasopharyngeal swabs were tested directly using the Aptima™ SARS-CoV-2 (Aptima) and Simplexa™ COVID-19 Direct (Simplexa), and with Altona RealStar® RT-PCR and CDC RT-PCR with nucleic acid extracted on the Roche® MagNA Pure 96 (Altona-MP96) or bioMérieux EMAG® (Altona-EMAG). Results/Conclusion: Overall percent-positive and percent-negative agreements among the six test systems were, respectively: Aptima: 94.8 and 100%; Altona-MP96: 96.5 and 99.3%; CDC-MP96: 100 and 99.3%; Altona-EMAG: 86.1 and 100%; CDC-EMAG: 98.2 and 100%; Simplexa: 87 and 99.2%. The six test systems showed agreement ranging from 92.7 (κ = 0.85) to 98.8% (κ = 0.98).

Saliva as a reliable sample for COVID-19 diagnosis in paediatric patients.

Saliva has been described a less invasive and easy to handle sample, compared to nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS), in the diagnosis of COVID-19 in adults. Although the advantages of using saliva is still more evident in paediatric patients, little is now about its sensitivity in this group. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of saliva to that of NPS in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in paediatric patients with mild symptoms. This study evaluated saliva samples from children with suspected COVID-19 who attended public healthcare services of Araraquara, Sao Paulo, Brazil. Children were asked to spit into a sterile container for collection of about 1ml of saliva after the NPS collection. SARS-COV-2 detection was performed by using the Altona RealStar(R) SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Kit 1.0. The sample consisted of 50 patients, in which 27 were girls (54%) and 23 were boys (46%). Ten were positive for SARS-CoV-2 in at least one sample collected. The mean age was 10.24 {+/-} 3.52 years old and saliva was collected after 4.76 {+/-} 1.31 days from the symptoms. Saliva and NPS have showed the same performance in the SARS-CoV-2 detection (k = 0.865, P < 0.001). In conclusion, saliva is a reliable alternative sample for COVID-19 diagnosis in paediatric population.

Point of care real-time polymerase chain reaction-based diagnostic for Kyasanur forest disease

ObjectivesDue to the remote forest area locations of sporadic cases and outbreaks of Kyasanur forest disease (KFD), rapid diagnosis poses a significant challenge. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of Truenat KFD, a simple, rapid and user-friendly point-of-care test for detection of KFD and compare diagnostic accuracy with conventional real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing. Truenat KFD can be deployed in a field laboratory setting. MethodsThe study involved 145 clinical specimens, including human serum, monkey necropsy tissues and tick pool, to validate Truenat KFD (Molbio Diagnostics Pvt.Ltd.) for KFD diagnosis. ResultsWe have optimized and validated the microchip-based Truenat KFD (Molbio Diagnostics Pvt.Ltd.) for KFD diagnosis. Point-of-care testing was highly sensitive and specific, with a detection limit of up to 10 copies of KFD viral RNA. Results were comparable with the gold-standard TaqMan and commercially available Altona RealStar AHFV / KFDV real-time RT-PCR assays. Screening results for human, monkey and tick specimens were 100% concordant across the assays. ConclusionTruenat KFD(Molbio Diagnostics Pvt.Ltd.) was found to be highly sensitive and specific with a significant limit of detection. This point-of-care test would be useful in rapid diagnosis of KFD in remote and/or field settings, quick patient management and control of virus spread.

Performance of at-home self-collected saliva and nasal-oropharyngeal swabs in the surveillance of COVID-19

ABSTRACT Background: SARS-CoV-2 quickly spreads in the worldwide population, imposing social restrictions to control the infection, being the massive testing another essential strategy to break the chain of transmission. Aim: To compare the performance of at-home self-collected samples – saliva and combined nasal-oropharyngeal swabs (NOP) – for SARS-CoV-2 detection in a telemedicine platform for COVID-19 surveillance. Material and methods: We analyzed 201 patients who met the criteria of suspected COVID-19. NOP sampling was combined (nostrils and oropharynx) and saliva collected using a cotton pad device. Detection of SARS-COV-2 was performed by using the Altona RealStar® SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Kit 1.0. Results: There was an overall significant agreement (κ coefficient value of 0.58) between saliva and NOP. Considering results in either sample, 70 patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 were identified, with 52/70 being positive in NOP and 55/70 in saliva. This corresponds to sensitivities of 74.2% (95% CI; 63.7% to 83.1%) for NOP and 78.6% (95% CI; 67.6% to 86.6%) for saliva. Conclusion: Our data show the feasibility of using at-home self-collected samples (especially saliva), as an adequate alternative for SARS-CoV-2 detection. This new approach of testing can be useful to develop strategies for COVID-19 surveillance and for guiding public health decisions.

Rapid Implementation of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Emergency Use Authorization RT-PCR Testing and Experience at an Academic Medical Institution

An epidemic caused by an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in China in December 2019 has since rapidly spread internationally, requiring urgent response from the clinical diagnostics community. We present a detailed overview of the clinical validation and implementation of the first laboratory-developed real-time RT-PCR test offered in the NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital system following the Emergency Use Authorization issued by the US Food and Drug Administration. Nasopharyngeal and sputum specimens (n = 174) were validated using newly designed dual-target real-time RT-PCR (altona RealStar SARS-CoV-2 Reagent) for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in upper respiratory tract and lower respiratory tract specimens. Accuracy testing demonstrated excellent assay agreement between expected and observed values and comparable diagnostic performance to reference tests. The limit of detection was 2.7 and 23.0 gene copies per reaction for nasopharyngeal and sputum specimens, respectively. Retrospective analysis of 1694 upper respiratory tract specimens from 1571 patients revealed increased positivity in older patients and males compared with females, and an increasing positivity rate from approximately 20% at the start of testing to 50% at the end of testing 3 weeks later. Herein, we demonstrate that the assay accurately and sensitively identifies SARS-CoV-2 in multiple specimen types in the clinical setting and summarize clinical data from early in the epidemic in New York City.

Performance of a commercial assay for detecting and quantifying HEV RNA in faeces

BackgroundDetecting hepatitis E virus (HEV) RNA in faeces is useful for diagnosing and monitoring HEV infections, particularly in immunocompromised patients requiring ribavirin therapy. ObjectivesThis study evaluated the performance of the Altona RealStar HEV RNA kit for detecting and quantifying HEV in faeces. Study designRNA was extracted from 94 stool samples by two methods: QIAamp Viral RNA Mini kit and MagNA Pure 96 automate. The Altona results were compared to a reference laboratory-developed accredited ISO15189 RT-PCR assay. ResultsThe Altona and reference assays detect HEV RNA in 77/93 (82.8%) and 83/93 (89.2%) of the QIAamp extracted samples, respectively, after exclusion of invalid result; they detected HEV RNA in 67/92 (72.8%) and 66/92 (71.7%) of the MagNA Pure extracted samples, respectively, which emphasizes the importance of the RNA extraction method. The HEV RNA concentrations obtained with Altona RT-PCR and the reference RT-PCR were well correlated whatever the extraction method, and Bland Altman analyses indicated that the Altona values were higher than the reference assay values. The Altona values for QIAamp-extracted and MagNA Pure-extracted HEV RNA were very similar. ConclusionsThe Altona RealStar assay is suitable for quantifying HEV RNA in the faeces and monitoring HEV RNA shedding during ribavirin therapy. Extraction is critical for detecting faecal HEV with high performance RT-PCR assays.

Evaluation of a human adenovirus viral load assay using the Altona RealStar® PCR test

This study evaluated the performance of the Altona Diagnostics RealStar® Adenovirus Research Use Only (RUO) real-time PCR reagents for HAdV quantitation in plasma samples from immunodeficient patients. The assay was linear from 2.30–9.17 log10 copies/mL (coefficient of determination; R2=0.998) with limits of detection and quantification of 2.19 log10 and 2.30 log10 copies/mL (>95% positivity rate), respectively. Assay precision was highly reproducible with coefficients of variance ranging from 0% to 4.7%. A comparison of 66 matched samples showed good agreement (R2=0.845) between the Altona and the reference laboratory assay, with an average negative bias (−0.24 log10 copies/mL). Genotyping analysis demonstrated that HAdV species B and C accounted for 77% of the positive samples. A significant (≥0.9 log10) difference in quantitation between both tests was found for three HAdV types (HAdV types A12, B14 and F41). In conclusion, the Altona RealStar® test is a reliable and sensitive assay for HAdV DNA quantitation.

Hepatitis E virus serology and PCR: does the methodology matter?

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) genotype 3 is an emerging pathogen in the developed world. As the clinical manifestations and routine laboratory parameters are often nonspecific, accurate diagnostic tests are crucial. In the current study, the performance of six serological assays and three PCR assays for the detection of HEV was evaluated. In the setting of the Ghent University Hospital, patients with clinically suspected HEV infection were tested for the presence of HEV IgM and IgG as well as HEV RNA. Serology was performed using six commercial HEV ELISA assays: Biorex, Wantai and Mikrogen IgM and IgG. HEV RNA was detected using one commercial assay (Altona RealStar®), and two optimized in-house real-time RT-PCR assays (according to Jothikumar et al., 2006 and Gyarmati et al., 2007). In addition, all three PCR assays were performed on 16 external quality control (EQC) samples. In a period of 39 months (January 2011-April 2014), 70 patients were enrolled. Using different ELISA assays, the prevalence of antibodies varied from 5.7% to 14.3% for HEV IgM and from 15.7% to 20.0% for IgG. All but two of the results of the PCR assays performed on clinical samples agreed. However, 10 out of 16 EQC samples results showed major discrepancies. We observed important differences in the performance of various serological and PCR assays. For this reason, results of both serological and molecular tests for HEV should be interpreted with caution.

Calibration of BK Virus Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing to the 1st WHO International Standard for BK Virus.

Significant interassay variability in the quantification of BK virus (BKV) DNA precludes establishing broadly applicable thresholds for the management of BKV infection in transplantation. The 1st WHO International Standard for BKV (primary standard) was introduced in 2016 as a common calibrator for improving the harmonization of BKV nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) and enabling comparisons of biological measurements worldwide. Here, we evaluated the Altona RealStar BKV assay (Altona) and calibrated the results to the international unit (IU) using the Exact Diagnostics BKV verification panel, a secondary standard traceable to the primary standard. The primary and secondary standards on Altona had nearly identical linear regression equations (primary standard, Y = 1.05X - 0.28, R2 = 0.99; secondary standard, Y = 1.04X - 0.26, R2 = 0.99) and conversion factors (primary standard, 1.11 IU/copy; secondary standard, 1.09 IU/copy). A comparison of Altona with a laboratory-developed BKV NAAT assay in IU/ml versus copies/ml using Passing-Bablok regression revealed similar regression lines, no proportional bias, and improvement in the systematic bias (95% confidence interval of intercepts: copies/ml, -0.52 to -1.01; IU/ml, 0.07 to -0.36). Additionally, Bland-Altman analyses revealed a clinically significant reduction of bias when results were reported in IU/ml (IU/ml, -0.10 log10; copies/ml, -0.70 log10). These results indicate that the use of a common calibrator improved the agreement between the two assays. As clinical laboratories worldwide use calibrators traceable to the primary standard to harmonize BKV NAAT results, we anticipate improved interassay comparisons with a potential for establishing broadly applicable quantitative BKV DNA load cutoffs for clinical practice.

Assessment of semi-automated nucleic acid testing programme in a Regional Blood Transfusion Centre

Background: Detection of human immunodeficiency virus type-1 (HIV-1), hepatitis-C (HCV) and hepatitis-B virus (HBV) in the blood donors is crucial. An efficient form of detection is nucleic acid testing (NAT) in blood screening. We assessed the suitability of commercial NAT testing in a developing country, focusing on the Altona RealStar assay and the method of Sacace Biotechnologies.Methods: We have standardised and validated commercially available NAT kits with a semi-automated system for detection of HBV, HCV and HIV-1 in blood donations. The MP-NAT (mini-pool) assay consists of pooling of sample, virus extraction, amplification and detection with commercially available NAT kits. An internal control (IC) is incorporated in the assay to monitor the extraction, target amplification and detection process.Results: The sensitivity of the Altona RealStar assay at 10-MP for each viral target was evaluated, HBV showed amplification in all diluted positive samples of 100, 50, 25, 10 and 5 IU/ml. HIV and HCV infected samples showed amplification in all diluted positive samples of 500, 100, 50 and 30 IU/ml. For HIV, out of six diluted samples of 30 IU/ml, five were amplified. A total of 14,170 seronegative blood samples were tested by RealStar PCR kit in 10-MP and 6 (0.042%) samples/pools were positive. A total of 65,362 seronegative blood donations were also tested by kits of Sacace Biotechnologies, in 10-MP and 45 (0.075%) pools were positive. The prevalence of combined NAT yield cases among routine donors was 1 in 1559 donations tested for all the 3 viruses.Conclusion: The semi-automated combined system for NAT screening assays is robust, sensitive, reproducible, and this gives an additional layer of safety with affordable cost.

Hepatitis E virus serology and PCR. Does the methodology matter?

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) genotype 3 is an emerging pathogen in the developed world. As the clinical manifestations and routine laboratory parameters are often nonspecific, accurate diagnostic tests are crucial. In the current study, the performance of six serological assays and three PCR assays for the detection of HEV was evaluated. In the setting of the Ghent University Hospital, patients with clinically suspected HEV infection were tested for the presence of HEV IgM and IgG as well as HEV RNA. Serology was performed using six commercial HEV ELISA assays: Biorex, Wantai and Mikrogen IgM and IgG. HEV RNA was detected using one commercial assay (Altona RealStar®), and two optimized in-house real-time RT-PCR assays (according to Jothikumar et al., 2006 and Gyarmati et al., 2007). In addition, all three PCR assays were performed on 16 external quality control (EQC) samples. In a period of 39 months (January 2011-April 2014), 70 patients were enrolled. Using different ELISA assays, the prevalence of antibodies varied from 5.7% to 14.3% for HEV IgM and from 15.7% to 20.0% for IgG. All but two of the results of the PCR assays performed on clinical samples agreed. However, 10 out of 16 EQC samples results showed major discrepancies. We observed important differences in the performance of various serological and PCR assays. For this reason, results of both serological and molecular tests for HEV should be interpreted with caution.