Over the past decade, West Nile virus (WNV) has spread across the United States. We aggregated blood donor data from 2010-2012 and then calculated the incidence of WNV RNA-positive donations and compared the incidence with neuroinvasive disease (NID) case data from the ArboNET surveillance system. Of 10,107,853 donations, 640 were confirmed positive. The seasonal WNV incidence rate per 100,000 persons was 33.4 (95% CI 22-45) in 2010, 25.7 (95% CI 15-34) in 2011, and 119.9 (95% CI 98-141) in 2012. NID to blood donor ratios were 1 in 164 (95% CI 152-178) in 2010, 1 in 158 (95% CI 145-174) in 2011, and 1 in 131 (95% CI 127-136) in 2012. We updated estimates of the ratio of NID to WNV infection rates, demonstrating stable disease penetrance over the study period. Blood donor WNV RNA screening is a valuable public health tool for WNV surveillance.

Background

Approximately 20 percent of persons infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) clear viremia. Factors associated with resolution of viremia are not well defined. Implementation of routine nucleic acid testing (NAT) of blood donors has yielded a large data set for analysis of demographic correlates of resolved viremia.

Study design and methods

HCV antibody and NAT data, liver enzyme (alanine aminotransferase [ALT]) results, and donor demographic characteristics were compiled for 2,579,290 allogeneic donations given at five large blood centers after NAT implementation in 1999 through December 2001. Donation HCV RNA status was compared between first-time donors categorized by ALT levels, sex, age, race and/or ethnicity, country of birth, level of education, blood center location, and blood group, with chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression methods.

Results

Of 35 confirmed-seropositive repeat donors, 19 (54.3%) tested negative for the presence of HCV RNA; there was no association between RNA status and preseroconversion intervals (p = 0.74). Of 2105 RIBA-positive, first-time donors, 402 (19.1%) tested negative for the presence of HCV RNA by NAT (presumptive resolved infections). There were significant differences in the frequency of RNA negativity among first-time donors categorized by ALT levels and by race and/or ethnicity. ALT levels were more likely to be elevated in RNA-positive, first-time donors (p < 0.0001). Viremia was less likely to resolve in Asian (8.2%) and black non-Hispanic (14.4%) donors than in white non-Hispanic (20.7%), Hispanic (22.1%), and other race and/or ethnicity (22.1%) donors (p = 0.02). No significant associations were found for age, sex, country of origin, level of education, blood type, and donor center location.

Conclusion

These results confirm that the frequency of HCV RNA negativity among seropositive persons differs by race and/or ethnicity. Follow-up studies of donors with resolved viremia are warranted to further elucidate viral, immunologic, and genetic factors underlying spontaneous viral clearance.

Confirmed diagnosis of chronic Chagas disease (CD) requires positive results by two different IgG serology tests. Variable sensitivity has been reported among tests and in different geographic regions. Inadequate specificity presents a particular challenge in low-prevalence settings such as the United States. This study provides a direct comparison of the latest-generation IgG serology assays with four previously assessed FDA-cleared tests. Seven hundred ten blood donor plasma specimens were evaluated by Wiener Lisado and Wiener v.4.0 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) and Abbott PRISM Chagas chemiluminescent assay (ChLIA). Sensitivity and specificity were assessed relative to infection status as determined by the original blood donation testing algorithm. All three latest-generation assays demonstrated 100% specificity (95% confidence interval [CI], 98.6 to 100.0). Wiener Lisado, Wiener v.4.0, and Abbott PRISM had sensitivities of 97.1% (95% CI, 95.1 to 98.4), 98.9% (95% CI, 97.4 to 99.6), and 95.5% (95% CI, 93.2 to 97.3), respectively. As with previously evaluated FDA-cleared tests, all three assays had the highest reactivity and sensitivity in samples from donors born in South America and lowest reactivity and sensitivity in specimens from those born in Mexico, with intermediate results in specimens from Central American donors. Wiener v.4.0 had the highest diagnostic sensitivity in all comparisons. Our findings suggest that the latest-generation CD serology tests could improve diagnostic sensitivity without affecting specificity.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring genotypes of HIV infections in blood donors may provide insights into infection trends in the general population. METHODS: HIV RNA was extracted from plasma samples of blood donors confirmed as HIV positive by blood screening nucleic acid and antibody tests. HIV genome target regions were amplified using nested real time-polymerase chain reaction followed by next-generation sequencing. Sequences were compared to those in the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) database. Sequences were also assessed for drug resistance mutations (DRM) using the Stanford HIV DRM Database. RESULTS: From available HIV-positive donations collected between 1 September 2015 and 31 December 2020, 563 of 743 (75.8%) were successfully sequenced; 4 were subtype A, 543 subtype B, 5 subtype C, 1 subtype G, 5 circulating recombinant forms (CRF), and 2 were subtype B and D recombinants. Overall, no significant differences between blood donor and available LANL genotypes were found, and the genotypes of newly acquired versus prevalent HIV infections in donors were similar. The proportion of non-B subtypes and CRF remained a small fraction, with no other subtype or CRF representing more than 1% of the total. DRM were identified in 122 (21.6%) samples with protease inhibitor, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor DRMs identified in 4.9%, 4.6% and 14.0% of samples, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HIV genetic diversity and DRM in blood donors appear representative of circulating HIV infections in the US general population and may provide more information on infection diversity than sequences reported to LANL, particularly for recently transmitted infections.

Background

SARS-CoV-2 infection can be detected indirectly by measuring the host immune response. For some viruses, antibody concentrations correlate with host protection and viral neutralization, but in rare cases, anti-viral antibodies can promote disease progression. Elucidation of the kinetics and magnitude of the SARS-CoV-2 antibody response is essential to understand the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and identify potential therapeutic targets.

Methods

Sera (n=533) from patients with RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 (n=94 with acute infections and n=59 convalescent patients) were tested using a high-throughput quantitative IgM and IgG assay that detects antibodies to the spike protein receptor binding domain and nucleocapsid protein. Individual and serial samples covered the time of initial diagnosis, during the disease course, and following recovery. We evaluated antibody kinetics and correlation between magnitude of the response and disease severity.

Results

Patterns of SARS-CoV-2 antibody production varied considerably. Among 52 patients with 3 or more serial specimens, 44 (84.6%) and 42 (80.8%) had observed IgM and IgG seroconversion at a median of 8 and 10 days, respectively. Compared to those with milder disease, peak measurements were significantly higher for patients admitted to the intensive care unit for all time intervals between 6 and 20 days for IgM, and all intervals after 5 days for IgG.

Conclusions

High sensitivity assays with a robust dynamic range provide a comprehensive picture of host antibody response to SARS-CoV-2. IgM and IgG responses were significantly higher in patients with severe than mild disease. These differences may affect strategies for seroprevalence studies, therapeutics and vaccine development.

UNLABELLED: Risk assessments of transfusion-transmitted emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) are complicated by the fact that blood donors demographics and behaviors can be different from the general population. Therefore, when assessing potential blood donor exposure to EIDs, the use of general population characteristics, such as U.S. travel statistics, may invoke uncertainties that result in inaccurate estimates of blood donor exposure. This may, in turn, lead to the creation of donor deferral policies that do not match actual risk. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This article reports on the development of a system to rapidly assess EID risks for a nationally representative portion of the U.S. blood donor population. To assess the effectiveness of this system, a test survey was developed and deployed to a statistically representative sample frame of blood donors from five blood collecting organizations. Donors were directed to an online survey to ascertain their recent travel and potential exposure to Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). RESULTS: A total of 7128 responses were received from 54 256 invitations. The age-adjusted estimated total number of blood donors potentially exposed to MERS-CoV was approximately 15 640 blood donors compared to a lower U.S. general population-based estimate of 9610 blood donors. CONCLUSION: The structured donor demographic sample-based data provided an assessment of blood donors potential exposure to an emerging pathogen that was 63% larger than the U.S. population-based estimate. This illustrates the need for tailored blood donor-based EID risk assessments that provide more specific demographic risk intelligence and can inform appropriate regulatory decision making.

Background

SARS-CoV-2 infection can be detected indirectly by measuring the host immune response. For some viruses, antibody concentrations correlate with host protection and viral neutralization, but in rare cases, anti-viral antibodies can promote disease progression. Elucidation of the kinetics and magnitude of the SARS-CoV-2 antibody response is essential to understand the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and identify potential therapeutic targets.

Methods

Sera (n=533) from patients with RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 (n=94 with acute infections and n=59 convalescent patients) were tested using a high-throughput quantitative IgM and IgG assay that detects antibodies to the spike protein receptor binding domain and nucleocapsid protein. Individual and serial samples covered the time of initial diagnosis, during the disease course, and following recovery. We evaluated antibody kinetics and correlation between magnitude of the response and disease severity.

Results

Patterns of SARS-CoV-2 antibody production varied considerably. Among 52 patients with 3 or more serial specimens, 44 (84.6%) and 42 (80.8%) had observed IgM and IgG seroconversion at a median of 8 and 10 days, respectively. Compared to those with milder disease, peak measurements were significantly higher for patients admitted to the intensive care unit for all time intervals between 6 and 20 days for IgM, and all intervals after 5 days for IgG.

Conclusions

High sensitivity assays with a robust dynamic range provide a comprehensive picture of host antibody response to SARS-CoV-2. IgM and IgG responses were significantly higher in patients with severe than mild disease. These differences may affect strategies for seroprevalence studies, therapeutics and vaccine development.

BACKGROUND: Individual risk assessment allows donors to be evaluated based on their own behaviors. Study objectives were to assess human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) risk behaviors in men who have sex with men (MSM) and estimate the proportion of the study population who would not be deferred for higher risk HIV sexual behaviors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Cross-sectional survey and biomarker assessment were conducted in eight U.S. cities. Participants were sexually active MSM interested in blood donation aged 18-39 years, assigned male sex at birth. Participants completed surveys during two study visits to define eligibility, and self-reported sexual and HIV prevention behaviors. Blood was drawn at study visit 1 and tested for HIV and the presence of tenofovir, one of the drugs in oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Associations were assessed between HIV infection status or HIV PrEP use and behaviors, including sex partners, new partners, and anal sex. RESULTS: A total of 1566 MSM completed the visit 1 questionnaire and blood draw and 1197 completed the visit 2 questionnaire. Among 1562 persons without HIV, 789 (50.4%) were not taking PrEP. Of those not taking PrEP, 66.2% reported one sexual partner or no anal sex and 69% reported no new sexual partners or no anal sex with a new partner in the past 3 months. CONCLUSION: The study found that questions were able to identify sexually active, HIV-negative MSM who report lower risk sexual behaviors. About a quarter of enrolled study participants would be potentially eligible blood donors using individual risk assessment questions.

BACKGROUND: Previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination, independently and combined (hybrid immunity), result in partial protection from subsequent infection and strong protection from severe disease. Proportions of the US population who have been infected, vaccinated, or have hybrid immunity remain unclear, posing a challenge for assessing effective pandemic mitigation strategies. METHODS: In this serial cross-sectional study, nationwide blood donor specimens collected during January-December 2021 were tested for anti-spike and anti-nucleocapsid antibodies, and donor COVID-19 vaccination history of ≥1 dose was collected. Monthly seroprevalence induced from SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 vaccination, or both, were estimated. Estimates were weighted to account for demographic differences from the general population and were compared temporally and by demographic factors. RESULTS: Overall, 1 123 855 blood samples were assayed. From January to December 2021, the weighted percentage of donations with seropositivity changed as follows: seropositivity due to vaccination without previous infection, increase from 3.5% (95% confidence interval, 3.4%-3.7%) to 64.0%, (63.5%-64.5%); seropositivity due to previous infection without vaccination, decrease from 15.6% (15.2%-16.0%) to 11.7% (11.4%-12.0%); and seropositivity due to hybrid immunity, increase from 0.7% (0.6%-0.7%) to 18.9% (18.5%-19.3%). Combined seroprevalence from infection, vaccination, or both increased from 19.8% (19.3%-20.2%) to 94.5% (93.5%-94.0%). Infection- and vaccination-induced antibody responses varied significantly by age, race-ethnicity, and region, but not by sex. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate substantial increases in population humoral immunity from SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 vaccination, and hybrid immunity during 2021. These findings are important to consider in future COVID-19 studies and long-term pandemic mitigation efforts.

Background

Previous studies have demonstrated low first-time donor return rates (DRR) following catastrophic events. Little is known, however, about the influence of demographic factors on the DRR of first-time donors during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the unique motivation of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) donors as compared to non-CCP donors.

Study design and methods

Thirteen blood collection organizations submitted deidentified data from first-time CCP and non-CCP donors returning for regular (non-CCP) donations during the pandemic. DRR was calculated as frequencies. Demographic factors associated with returning donors: race/ethnicity, gender, and generation (Gen Z: 19-24, Millennial: 25-40, Gen X: 41-56, and Boomer: ≥57 years old), within the CCP and non-CCP first-time cohorts were compared using chi-square test at p < .05 statistical significance.

Results

From March 2020 through December 2021, there were a total of 44,274 first-time CCP and 980,201 first-time non-CCP donors. DRR were 14.6% (range 11.9%-43.3%) and 46.6% (range 10.0%-76.9%) for CCP and non-CCP cohorts, respectively. Age over 40 years (Gen X and Boomers), female gender, and White race were each associated with higher return in both donor cohorts (p < .001). For the non-CCP return donor cohort, the Millennial and Boomers were comparable.

Conclusion

The findings demonstrate differences in returning donor trends between the two donor cohorts. The motivation of a first-time CCP donor may be different than that of a non-CCP donor. Further study to improve first-time donor engagement would be worthwhile to expand the donor base with a focus on blood donor diversity emphasizing engagement of underrepresented minorities and younger donors.