Candida auris is an emerging fungal pathogen that typically affects patients in healthcare settings. Data on C. auris cases in correctional facilities are limited but are needed to guide public health recommendations. We describe cases and challenges of providing care for 13 patients who were transferred to correctional facilities during January 2020-December 2022 after having a positive C. auris specimen. All patients had positive specimens identified while receiving inpatient care at healthcare facilities in geographic areas with high C. auris prevalence. Correctional facilities reported challenges managing patients and implementing prevention measures; those challenges varied by whether patients were housed in prison medical units or general population units. Although rarely reported, C. auris cases in persons who are incarcerated may occur, particularly in persons with known risk factors. Measures to manage cases and prevent C. auris spread in correctional facilities should address setting-specific challenges in healthcare and nonhealthcare correctional environments.

Background Performance characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests among children are limited despite the need for point-of-care testing in school and childcare settings. We describe children seeking SARS-CoV-2 testing at a community site and compare antigen test performance to real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and viral culture.Methods Two anterior nasal specimens were self-collected for BinaxNOW antigen and RT-PCR testing, along with demographics, symptoms, and exposure information from individuals ≥5 years at a community testing site. Viral culture was attempted on residual antigen or RT-PCR positive specimens. Demographic and clinical characteristics, and the performance of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests, were compared among children (<18 years) and adults.Results About one in ten included specimens were from children (225/2110); 16.4% (37/225) were RT-PCR positive. Cycle threshold values were similar among RT-PCR positive specimens from children and adults (22.5 vs 21.3, p=0.46) and among specimens from symptomatic and asymptomatic children (22.5 vs 23.2, p=0.39). Sensitivity of antigen test compared to RT-PCR was 73.0% (27/37) among specimens from children and 80.8% (240/297) among specimens from adults; among specimens from children, specificity was 100% (188/188), positive and negative predictive value were 100% (27/27) and 94.9% (188/198) respectively. Virus was isolated from 51.4% (19/37) of RT-PCR positive pediatric specimens; all 19 had positive antigen test results.Conclusions With lower sensitivity relative to RT-PCR, antigen tests may not diagnose all positive COVID-19 cases; however, antigen testing identified children with live SARS-CoV-2 virus.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This activity was reviewed by CDC and was conducted consistent with applicable federal law and CDC policy. See e.g., 45 C.F.R. part 46.102(l)(2), 21 C.F.R. part 56; 42 U.S.C. 241(d); 5 U.S.C. 552a; 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe datasets generated during and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

We assessed the relationship between antigen and reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) test positivity and successful virus isolation. We found that antigen test results were more predictive of virus recovery than RT-PCR results. However, virus was isolated from some antigen-negative and RT-PCR‒positive paired specimens, providing support for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention antigen testing algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Performance characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests among children are limited despite the need for point-of-care testing in school and childcare settings. We describe children seeking SARS-CoV-2 testing at a community site and compare antigen test performance to real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and viral culture. METHODS: Two anterior nasal specimens were self-collected for BinaxNOW antigen and RT-PCR testing, along with demographics, symptoms, and exposure information from individuals ≥5 years at a community testing site. Viral culture was attempted on residual antigen or RT-PCR-positive specimens. Demographic and clinical characteristics, and the performance of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests, were compared among children (<18 years) and adults. RESULTS: About 1 in 10 included specimens were from children (225/2110); 16.4% (37/225) were RT-PCR-positive. Cycle threshold values were similar among RT-PCR-positive specimens from children and adults (22.5 vs 21.3, P = .46) and among specimens from symptomatic and asymptomatic children (22.5 vs 23.2, P = .39). Sensitivity of antigen test compared to RT-PCR was 73.0% (27/37) among specimens from children and 80.8% (240/297) among specimens from adults; among specimens from children, specificity was 100% (188/188), positive and negative predictive values were 100% (27/27) and 94.9% (188/198), respectively. Virus was isolated from 51.4% (19/37) of RT-PCR-positive pediatric specimens; all 19 had positive antigen test results. CONCLUSIONS: With lower sensitivity relative to RT-PCR, antigen tests may not diagnose all positive COVID-19 cases; however, antigen testing identified children with live SARS-CoV-2 virus.

We used the BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card to screen 1,540 asymptomatic college students for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in a low-prevalence setting. Compared with reverse transcription PCR, BinaxNOW showed 20% overall sensitivity; among participants with culturable virus, sensitivity was 60%. BinaxNOW provides point-of-care screening but misses many infections.

BACKGROUND: The natural history and clinical progression of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections can be better understood using combined serological and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing. METHODS: Nasopharyngeal swabs and serum were collected at a single time-point from patients at an urban, public hospital August - November 2020 and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR, viral culture, and anti-Spike pan-Ig antibody testing. Participant demographics and symptoms were collected through interview. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests were used to identify associations between RT-PCR and serology results with presence of viable virus and frequency of symptoms. RESULTS: Among 592 participants, 129 (21.8%) had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT-PCR or serology. Presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was strongly associated with lack of viable virus (p-value=0.016). COVID-19 symptom frequency was similar for patients testing RT-PCR positive/seronegative and patients testing RT-PCR positive/seropositive. Patients testing RT-PCR positive/seronegative reported headaches, fatigue, diarrhea and vomiting at rates not statistically significantly different from those testing RT-PCR negative/seropositive. CONCLUSIONS: While patients testing SARS-CoV-2 seropositive were unlikely to test positive for viable virus and were therefore low-risk for forward transmission, COVID-19 symptoms were common. Paired SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and antibody testing provides more nuanced understanding of patients' COVID-19 status.

BACKGROUND: To address high COVID-19 burden in U.S. nursing homes, rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests have been widely distributed in those facilities. However, performance data are lacking, especially in asymptomatic people. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing when used for facility-wide testing during a nursing home outbreak. DESIGN: A prospective evaluation involving 3 facility-wide rounds of testing where paired respiratory specimens were collected to evaluate the performance of the BinaxNOW antigen test compared with virus culture and real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Early and late infection were defined using changes in RT-PCR cycle threshold values and prior test results. SETTING: A nursing home with an ongoing SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. PARTICIPANTS: 532 paired specimens collected from 234 available residents and staff. MEASUREMENTS: Percentage of positive agreement (PPA) and percentage of negative agreement (PNA) for BinaxNOW compared with RT-PCR and virus culture. RESULTS: BinaxNOW PPA with virus culture, used for detection of replication-competent virus, was 95%. However, the overall PPA of antigen testing with RT-PCR was 69%, and PNA was 98%. When only the first positive test result was analyzed for each participant, PPA of antigen testing with RT-PCR was 82% among 45 symptomatic people and 52% among 343 asymptomatic people. Compared with RT-PCR and virus culture, the BinaxNOW test performed well in early infection (86% and 95%, respectively) and poorly in late infection (51% and no recovered virus, respectively). LIMITATION: Accurate symptom ascertainment was challenging in nursing home residents; test performance may not be representative of testing done by nonlaboratory staff. CONCLUSION: Despite lower positive agreement compared with RT-PCR, antigen test positivity had higher agreement with shedding of replication-competent virus. These results suggest that antigen testing could be a useful tool to rapidly identify contagious people at risk for transmitting SARS-CoV-2 during nascent outbreaks and help reduce COVID-19 burden in nursing homes. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

BACKGROUND: Real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and antigen tests are important diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2. Sensitivity of antigen tests has been shown to be lower than that of rRT-PCR; however, data to evaluate epidemiologic characteristics that affect test performance are limited. METHODS: Paired mid-turbinate nasal swabs were collected from university students and staff and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using both Quidel Sofia SARS Antigen Fluorescent Immunoassay (FIA) and rRT-PCR assay. Specimens positive by either rRT-PCR or antigen FIA were placed in viral culture and tested for subgenomic RNA (sgRNA). Logistic regression models were used to evaluate characteristics associated with antigen results, rRT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values, sgRNA, and viral culture. RESULTS: Antigen FIA sensitivity was 78.9% and 43.8% among symptomatic and asymptomatic participants respectively. Among rRT-PCR positive participants, negative antigen results were more likely among asymptomatic participants (OR 4.6, CI:1.3-15.4) and less likely among participants reporting nasal congestion (OR 0.1, CI:0.03-0.8). rRT-PCR-positive specimens with higher Ct values (OR 0.5, CI:0.4-0.8) were less likely, and specimens positive for sgRNA (OR 10.2, CI:1.6-65.0) more likely, to yield positive virus isolation. Antigen testing was >90% positive in specimens with Ct values <29. Positive predictive value of antigen test for positive viral culture (57.7%) was similar to that of rRT-PCR (59.3%). CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 antigen test advantages include low cost, wide availability and rapid turnaround time, making them important screening tests. The performance of antigen tests may vary with patient characteristics, so performance characteristics should be accounted for when designing testing strategies and interpreting results.

Rapid antigen tests, such as the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card (BinaxNOW), offer results more rapidly (approximately 15-30 minutes) and at a lower cost than do highly sensitive nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) (1). Rapid antigen tests have received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for use in symptomatic persons (2), but data are lacking on test performance in asymptomatic persons to inform expanded screening testing to rapidly identify and isolate infected persons (3). To evaluate the performance of the BinaxNOW rapid antigen test, it was used along with real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing to analyze 3,419 paired specimens collected from persons aged ≥10 years at two community testing sites in Pima County, Arizona, during November 3-17, 2020. Viral culture was performed on 274 of 303 residual real-time RT-PCR specimens with positive results by either test (29 were not available for culture). Compared with real-time RT-PCR testing, the BinaxNOW antigen test had a sensitivity of 64.2% for specimens from symptomatic persons and 35.8% for specimens from asymptomatic persons, with near 100% specificity in specimens from both groups. Virus was cultured from 96 of 274 (35.0%) specimens, including 85 (57.8%) of 147 with concordant antigen and real-time RT-PCR positive results, 11 (8.9%) of 124 with false-negative antigen test results, and none of three with false-positive antigen test results. Among specimens positive for viral culture, sensitivity was 92.6% for symptomatic and 78.6% for asymptomatic individuals. When the pretest probability for receiving positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 is elevated (e.g., in symptomatic persons or in persons with a known COVID-19 exposure), a negative antigen test result should be confirmed by NAAT (1). Despite a lower sensitivity to detect infection, rapid antigen tests can be an important tool for screening because of their quick turnaround time, lower costs and resource needs, high specificity, and high positive predictive value (PPV) in settings of high pretest probability. The faster turnaround time of the antigen test can help limit transmission by more rapidly identifying infectious persons for isolation, particularly when used as a component of serial testing strategies.

Antigen-based tests for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), are inexpensive and can return results within 15 minutes (1). Antigen tests have received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for use in asymptomatic and symptomatic persons within the first 5-12 days after symptom onset (2). These tests have been used at U.S. colleges and universities and other congregate settings (e.g., nursing homes and correctional and detention facilities), where serial testing of asymptomatic persons might facilitate early case identification (3-5). However, test performance data from symptomatic and asymptomatic persons are limited. This investigation evaluated performance of the Sofia SARS Antigen Fluorescent Immunoassay (FIA) (Quidel Corporation) compared with real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 detection among asymptomatic and symptomatic persons at two universities in Wisconsin. During September 28-October 9, a total of 1,098 paired nasal swabs were tested using the Sofia SARS Antigen FIA and real-time RT-PCR. Virus culture was attempted on all antigen-positive or real-time RT-PCR-positive specimens. Among 871 (79%) paired swabs from asymptomatic participants, the antigen test sensitivity was 41.2%, specificity was 98.4%, and in this population the estimated positive predictive value (PPV) was 33.3%, and negative predictive value (NPV) was 98.8%. Antigen test performance was improved among 227 (21%) paired swabs from participants who reported one or more symptoms at specimen collection (sensitivity = 80.0%; specificity = 98.9%; PPV = 94.1%; NPV = 95.9%). Virus was isolated from 34 (46.6%) of 73 antigen-positive or real-time RT-PCR-positive nasal swab specimens, including two of 18 that were antigen-negative and real-time RT-PCR-positive (false-negatives). The advantages of antigen tests such as low cost and rapid turnaround might allow for rapid identification of infectious persons. However, these advantages need to be balanced against lower sensitivity and lower PPV, especially among asymptomatic persons. Confirmatory testing with an FDA-authorized nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT), such as RT-PCR, should be considered after negative antigen test results in symptomatic persons, and after positive antigen test results in asymptomatic persons (1).

The ongoing hepatitis A outbreaks in multiple states in the United States have concerned public health authorities since March 2017. The outbreaks have spread throughout 30 states and include primarily persons who use drugs, including persons who inject drugs (PWID) and persons experiencing homelessness. Contaminated drug injection paraphernalia and sharing of these items could potentially aid in transmission of hepatitis A virus (HAV) among these populations. We examined HAV survival on drug paraphernalia frequently shared among PWIDs. The effect of low pH on HAV survival using citric acid, which is frequently used by PWIDs during dose preparation, was investigated. We compared the plaque assay results with those concurrently obtained by qRT-PCR to establish whether HAV RNA levels could be used as surrogates for plaque assay results. HAV suspended in minimal essential media at room temperature infected FRhK4 cells for more than 17 weeks. HAV remained viable in syringes/needles for up to 10 weeks depending on the gauge of the needles and the syringe dead-volumes, and on cookers, tourniquets and cotton balls/filter surfaces for up to 4 weeks. HAV retained its infectivity for more than 10 weeks at pH as low as 2. In conclusion, our findings show that HAV survives and remains infective in or on injection drug use equipment for 1 to 10 weeks depending on the type of paraphernalia examined and environmental conditions. These findings suggest that contaminated drug paraphernalia can potentially facilitate the transmission of HAV within populations who share these items.

BACKGROUND: Molecular surveillance and outbreak investigation are important for elimination of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the United States. A web-based system, Global Hepatitis Outbreak and Surveillance Technology (GHOST), has been developed using Illumina MiSeq-based amplicon sequence data derived from the HCV E1/E2-junction genomic region to enable public health institutions to conduct cost-effective and accurate molecular surveillance, outbreak detection and strain characterization. However, as there are many factors that could impact input data quality to which the GHOST system is not completely immune, accuracy of epidemiological inferences generated by GHOST may be affected. Here, we analyze the data submitted to the GHOST system during its pilot phase to assess the nature of the data and to identify common quality concerns that can be detected and corrected automatically. RESULTS: The GHOST quality control filters were individually examined, and quality failure rates were measured for all samples, including negative controls. New filters were developed and introduced to detect primer dimers, loss of specimen-specific product, or short products. The genotyping tool was adjusted to improve the accuracy of subtype calls. The identification of "chordless" cycles in a transmission network from data generated with known laboratory-based quality concerns allowed for further improvement of transmission detection by GHOST in surveillance settings. Parameters derived to detect actionable common quality control anomalies were incorporated into the automatic quality control module that rejects data depending on the magnitude of a quality problem, and warns and guides users in performing correctional actions. The guiding responses generated by the system are tailored to the GHOST laboratory protocol. CONCLUSIONS: Several new quality control problems were identified in MiSeq data submitted to GHOST and used to improve protection of the system from erroneous data and users from erroneous inferences. The GHOST system was upgraded to include identification of causes of erroneous data and recommendation of corrective actions to laboratory users.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C is a major public health problem in the United States and worldwide. Outbreaks of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections associated with unsafe injection practices, drug diversion, and other exposures to blood are difficult to detect and investigate. Effective HCV outbreak investigation requires comprehensive surveillance and robust case investigation. We previously developed and validated a methodology for the rapid and cost-effective identification of HCV transmission clusters. Global Hepatitis Outbreak and Surveillance Technology (GHOST) is a cloud-based system enabling users, regardless of computational expertise, to analyze and visualize transmission clusters in an independent, accurate and reproducible way. RESULTS: We present and explore performance of several GHOST implemented algorithms using next-generation sequencing data experimentally obtained from hypervariable region 1 of genetically related and unrelated HCV strains. GHOST processes data from an entire MiSeq run in approximately 3 h. A panel of seven specimens was used for preparation of six repeats of MiSeq libraries. Testing sequence data from these libraries by GHOST showed a consistent transmission linkage detection, testifying to high reproducibility of the system. Lack of linkage among genetically unrelated HCV strains and constant detection of genetic linkage between HCV strains from known transmission pairs and from follow-up specimens at different levels of MiSeq-read sampling indicate high specificity and sensitivity of GHOST in accurate detection of HCV transmission. CONCLUSIONS: GHOST enables automatic extraction of timely and relevant public health information suitable for guiding effective intervention measures. It is designed as a virtual diagnostic system intended for use in molecular surveillance and outbreak investigations rather than in research. The system produces accurate and reproducible information on HCV transmission clusters for all users, irrespective of their level of bioinformatics expertise. Improvement in molecular detection capacity will contribute to increasing the rate of transmission detection, thus providing opportunity for rapid, accurate and effective response to outbreaks of hepatitis C. Although GHOST was originally developed for hepatitis C surveillance, its modular structure is readily applicable to other infectious diseases. Worldwide availability of GHOST for the detection of HCV transmissions will foster deeper involvement of public health researchers and practitioners in hepatitis C outbreak investigation.