INTRODUCTION: The African Center for Integrated Laboratory Training (ACILT) in Johannesburg, South Africa offered a laboratory biosafety program to improve laboratory biosafety practices in 22 President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) supported countries. This manuscript evaluates the transference of newly gained knowledge and skills to the participants' place of employment for HIV and TB diagnostic laboratory programs. It also serves as a follow-on to a previously published manuscript that measured training effectiveness for all courses offered at ACILT. METHODS: ACILT offered 20 Laboratory Biosafety and Infrastructure courses (2008-2014), also referred as biosafety course/course comprising of 14 core laboratory safety elements to 402 participants from 22 countries. In 2015, participants received 22 e-questions divided into four categories: (1) Safety Policies, (2) Management's Engagement, (3) Safety Programs and (4) Assessments of Safety Practices to determine retrospectively the training effectiveness of biosafety practices in their place of employment 6 months before and after attending their course. We used Kirkpatrick model to assess the transference of knowledge, skills and obstructive factors. RESULTS: 20% (81/402) of the participants completed the e-questionnaire. The overall percentage of positive responses indicating implementation of new safety practices increased from 50% to 84%. Improvement occurred in all four categories after attending the course, with the greatest increases in Safety Policies (67-94%) and Safety Programs (43-91%). Creating a safety committee, allocating resources, and establishing a facility safety policy were important drivers for implementing and maintaining laboratory safety practices. In addition, accredited laboratories and countries with national safety regulations or policies had a higher percentage of improvements. The most reported challenges were inadequate funding and lack of management enforcement. CONCLUSIONS: PEPFAR and other partners' investments in training institutions, such as ACILT, were effective in building sustainable country ownership to strengthen biosafety practices and were leveraged to combat zoonotic diseases and COVID-19. Although support continues at the national/regional level, a standardized, coordinated and continent-wide sustainable approach to offer a biosafety program-like ACILT is missing. Continuous offerings of biosafety programs similar to ACILT could contribute to sustainable strengthening of laboratory biosafety, QMS and pandemic preparedness.

Background: Healthcare workers' acceptance of and ability to perform point-of-care testing is important for reliable and accurate results. The Alere Pima() CD4 assay (Pima CD4) is the CD4 point-of-care test for HIV management in Tanzania. Objectives: To evaluate healthcare workers' acceptance and performance of Pima CD4 testing. Methods: The study was implemented in five high volume sites in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, in 2011. Trained healthcare workers performed Pima testing using three whole-blood specimens collected from each patient: venous blood, fingerstick blood directly applied to a Pima cartridge (capillary-direct), and fingerstick blood collected in a microtube (capillary-microtube). Using a semi-structured interview guide, we interviewed 11 healthcare workers about specimen collection methods and Pima CD4 acceptability. Quantitative responses were analysed using descriptive statistics. Open-ended responses were summarised by thematic areas. Pima CD4 results were analysed to determine variation between cadres. Results: Healthcare workers found Pima CD4 user-friendly and recommended its use in low volume, peripheral facilities. Both venous and capillary-direct blood were considered easy to collect, with venous preferred. Advantages noted with venous and capillary-microtube methods were the ability to retest, perform multiple tests, or delay testing. Pima CD4 results were trusted by the healthcare workers and were in agreement with laboratory Pima testing. Conclusion: In this point-of-care testing setting, the Pima CD4 assay was accepted by healthcare workers. Both venous and fingerstick capillary blood specimens can be used with Pima CD4, but fingerstick methods may require more intensive training on technique to minimise variation in results and increase acceptability.

INTRODUCTION: Effective point-of-care testing (POCT) is reliant on optimal specimen collection, quality assured testing, and expedited return of results. Many of the POCT are designed to be used with fingerstick capillary blood to simplify the blood collection burden. However, fingerstick blood collection has inherent errors in sampling. An evaluation of the use of capillary and venous blood with CD4 POCT was conducted. METHODS: Three different specimen collection methods were evaluated for compatibility using the Alere Pima CD4 assay at 5 HIV/AIDS healthcare sites in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. At each site, whole blood specimens were collected from enrolled patients by venipuncture and fingerstick. Pima CD4 testing was performed at site of collection on venipuncture specimens (Venous) and fingerstick blood directly applied to a Pima CD4 cartridge (Capillary-Direct) and collected into an EDTA microtube (Capillary-Microtube). Venous blood was also tested at the laboratory by the reference CD4 method and Pima for comparison analysis. RESULTS: All three specimen collection methods were successfully collected by healthcare workers for use with the Pima CD4 assay. When compared to the reference CD4 method, Pima CD4 testing with the Capillary-Microtube method performed similarly to Venous, while Pima CD4 counts with the Capillary-Direct method were slightly more biased (-20 cells/muL) and variable (-229 to +189 cells/muL limit of agreement). Even though all three collection methods had similar invalid Pima testing rates (10.5%, 9.8%, and 8.3% for Capillary-Direct, Capillary-Microtube, and Venous respectively), the ability to perform repeat testing with Capillary-Microtube and Venous specimens increased the likelihood of acquiring a valid CD4 result with the Pima assay. CONCLUSIONS: Capillary blood, either directly applied to Pima CD4 cartridges or collected in an EDTA microtube, and venous blood are suitable specimens for Pima CD4 testing. The advantages of capillary blood collection in an EDTA microtube are that it uses fingerstick collection which mimics venous blood and allows extra testing without additional blood collection.

BACKGROUND: Male circumcision provides men with approximately 60% protection from acquiring HIV infection via heterosexual sex, and has become a key component of HIV prevention efforts in sub-Saharan Africa. Possible mechanisms for this protection include removal of the inflammatory anaerobic sub-preputial environment and the high concentration of Langerhans cells on the inside of the foreskin, both believed to promote local vulnerability to HIV infection. In people who do acquire HIV, viral load is partially determined by infecting partner viral load, potentially mediated by size of infecting inoculum. By removing a portal for virion entry, prior male circumcision could decrease infecting inoculum and thus viral load in men who become HIV-infected, conferring the known associated benefits of slower progression to disease and decreased infectiousness. METHODS: We performed an as-treated analysis of plasma samples collected under a randomized controlled trial of male circumcision for HIV prevention, comparing men based on their circumcision status at the time of HIV acquisition, to determine whether circumcision is associated with lower viral load. Eligible men were seroconverters who had at least one plasma sample available drawn at least 6 months after infection, reported no potential exposures other than vaginal sex and, for those who were circumcised, were infected more than 6 weeks after circumcision, to eliminate the open wound as a confounder. Initial viral load testing indicated that quality of pre-2007 samples might have been compromised during storage and they were excluded, as were those with undetectable or unquantifiable results. Log viral loads were compared between groups using univariable and multivariable linear regression, adjusting for sample age and sexually transmitted infection diagnosis with 3.5 months of seroconversion, with a random effect for intra-individual clustering for samples from the same man. A per-protocol analysis was also performed. RESULTS: There were no viral load differences between men who were circumcised and uncircumcised at the time of HIV infection (means 4.00 and 4.03 log10 copies/mL respectively, p = .88) in any analysis. CONCLUSION: Circumcision status at the time of HIV infection does not affect viral load in men. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The original RCT which provided the samples was ClinicalTrials.gov trial NCT00059371 .

Importance: Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide. Current estimates on the burden of cancer are needed for cancer control planning. Objective: To estimate mortality, incidence, years lived with disability (YLDs), years of life lost (YLLs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 32 cancers in 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2015. Evidence Review: Cancer mortality was estimated using vital registration system data, cancer registry incidence data (transformed to mortality estimates using separately estimated mortality to incidence [MI] ratios), and verbal autopsy data. Cancer incidence was calculated by dividing mortality estimates through the modeled MI ratios. To calculate cancer prevalence, MI ratios were used to model survival. To calculate YLDs, prevalence estimates were multiplied by disability weights. The YLLs were estimated by multiplying age-specific cancer deaths by the reference life expectancy. DALYs were estimated as the sum of YLDs and YLLs. A sociodemographic index (SDI) was created for each location based on income per capita, educational attainment, and fertility. Countries were categorized by SDI quintiles to summarize results. Findings: In 2015, there were 17.5 million cancer cases worldwide and 8.7 million deaths. Between 2005 and 2015, cancer cases increased by 33%, with population aging contributing 16%, population growth 13%, and changes in age-specific rates contributing 4%. For men, the most common cancer globally was prostate cancer (1.6 million cases). Tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer was the leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs in men (1.2 million deaths and 25.9 million DALYs). For women, the most common cancer was breast cancer (2.4 million cases). Breast cancer was also the leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs for women (523000 deaths and 15.1 million DALYs). Overall, cancer caused 208.3 million DALYs worldwide in 2015 for both sexes combined. Between 2005 and 2015, age-standardized incidence rates for all cancers combined increased in 174 of 195 countries or territories. Age-standardized death rates (ASDRs) for all cancers combined decreased within that timeframe in 140 of 195 countries or territories. Countries with an increase in the ASDR due to all cancers were largely located on the African continent. Of all cancers, deaths between 2005 and 2015 decreased significantly for Hodgkin lymphoma (-6.1% [95% uncertainty interval (UI), -10.6% to -1.3%]). The number of deaths also decreased for esophageal cancer, stomach cancer, and chronic myeloid leukemia, although these results were not statistically significant. Conclusion and Relevance: As part of the epidemiological transition, cancer incidence is expected to increase in the future, further straining limited health care resources. Appropriate allocation of resources for cancer prevention, early diagnosis, and curative and palliative care requires detailed knowledge of the local burden of cancer. The GBD 2015 study results demonstrate that progress is possible in the war against cancer. However, the major findings also highlight an unmet need for cancer prevention efforts, including tobacco control, vaccination, and the promotion of physical activity and a healthy diet.

BACKGROUND: The Alere point-of-care (POC) Pima CD4 analyzer allows for decentralized testing and expansion to testing antiretroviral therapy (ART) eligibility. A consortium conducted a pooled multi-data technical performance analysis of the Pima CD4. METHODS: Primary data (11,803 paired observations) comprised 22 independent studies between 2009-2012 from the Caribbean, Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, USA and Europe, using 6 laboratory-based reference technologies. Data were analyzed as categorical (including binary) and numerical (absolute) observations using a bivariate and/or univariate random effects model when appropriate. RESULTS: At a median reference CD4 of 383 cells/mul the mean Pima CD4 bias is -23 cells/mul (average bias across all CD4 ranges is 10 % for venous and 15 % for capillary testing). Sensitivity of the Pima CD4 is 93 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 91.4 % - 94.9 %) at 350 cells/mul and 96 % (CI 95.2 % - 96.9 %) at 500 cells/mul, with no significant difference between venous and capillary testing. Sensitivity reduced to 86 % (CI 82 % - 89 %) at 100 cells/mul (for Cryptococcal antigen (CrAg) screening), with a significant difference between venous (88 %, CI: 85 % - 91 %) and capillary (79 %, CI: 73 % - 84 %) testing. Total CD4 misclassification is 2.3 % cases at 100 cells/mul, 11.0 % at 350 cells/mul and 9.5 % at 500 cells/mul, due to higher false positive rates which resulted in more patients identified for treatment. This increased by 1.2 %, 2.8 % and 1.8 %, respectively, for capillary testing. There was no difference in Pima CD4 misclassification between the meta-analysis data and a population subset of HIV+ ART naive individuals, nor in misclassification among operator cadres. The Pima CD4 was most similar to Beckman Coulter PanLeucogated CD4, Becton Dickinson FACSCalibur and FACSCount, and less similar to Partec CyFlow reference technologies. CONCLUSIONS: The Pima CD4 may be recommended using venous-derived specimens for screening (100 cells/mul) for reflex CrAg screening and for HIV ART eligibility at 350 cells/mul and 500 cells/mul thresholds using both capillary and venous derived specimens. These meta-analysis findings add to the knowledge of acceptance criteria of the Pima CD4 and future POC tests, but implementation and impact will require full costing analysis.

BACKGROUND: CD4 count is used to determine antiretroviral therapy (ART) eligibility. In China, flow cytometers are mostly located in urban areas with limited access by patients residing in remote areas. In an attempt to address this issue, we conducted a study to validate the performance of Alere PIMA point-of-care CD4 analyzer. METHODS: Venous and finger-prick blood specimens were collected from HIV-positive participants from two voluntary counseling and testing sites in Yunnan Province. Both venous and finger-prick blood specimens were tested with the PIMA analyzer. Venous blood specimens tested with the Becton Dickinson FACSCalibur were used as a reference. RESULTS: Venous specimens from 396 and finger-prick specimens from 387 persons were available for analysis. CD4 counts by PIMA correlated well with those from FACSCalibur with an R2 of 0.91 for venous blood and 0.81 for finger-prick blood. Compared to FACSCalibur, the PIMA analyzer yielded lower counts with a mean bias of - 47.0 cells/mul (limit of agreement, [LOA]: -204-110 cells/mul) for venous blood and -71.0 cells/mul (LOA: -295-153 cells/mul) for finger-prick blood. For a CD4 threshold of 350 cells/mul, the positive predictive value (PPV) of PIMA was 84.2% and 75.7% and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 97.6% and 95.8% for venous and finger-prick blood, respectively. For an ART threshold of 500 cells/mul, the corresponding PPV was 90.3% and 84.0% and NPV was 94.3% and 93.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CD4 counting using venous blood with PIMA analyzers is a feasible alternative to a large flow cytometer to determine ART eligibility.

INTRODUCTION: Point-of-care (POC) CD4 testing can improve access to treatment by enabling decentralization and reducing patient loss-to-follow-up. As new POC CD4 technologies become available, their performance should be assessed before widespread deployment. This study reports the findings of five independent evaluations of the PointCare NOW CD4 system. MATERIALS/METHODS: Evaluations were conducted in Southern Africa (Mozambique, South Africa) and North America (Canada, USA). 492 blood samples (55 from HIV-negative blood donors and 437 from HIV-infected patients, including 20 children aged between 12 and 59 months) were tested with both the PointCare NOW and reference flow cytometry instruments. Assessment of bias, precision and levels of clinical misclassification for absolute and percent CD4 count was conducted. RESULTS: PointCare NOW significantly overestimated CD4 absolute counts with a mean relative bias of +35.0%. Bias was greater in samples with CD4 counts below ≤350cells/microl (+51.3%) than in the CD4 >350cells/microl stratum (15.1%). Bias in CD4% had a similar trend with an overall relative mean bias of +25.6% and a larger bias for low CD4 stratum (+40.2%) than the higher CD4 stratum (+5.8%). Relative bias for CD4% in children was -6.8%. In terms of repeatability, PointCare NOW had a coefficient of variation of 11%. Using a threshold of 350cells/microl, only 47% of patients who qualified for antiretroviral therapy with reference CD4 testing, would have been eligible for treatment with PointCare NOW test results. This was 39% using a 200cells/microl threshold. Agreement with infant samples was higher, with 90% qualifying at a 25% eligibility threshold. CONCLUSION: The performance of the PointCare NOW instrument for absolute and percent CD4 enumeration was inadequate for HIV clinical management in adults. In children, the small sample size was not large enough to draw a conclusion. This study also highlights the importance of independent evaluation of new diagnostic technology platforms before deployment.

The potential for emergencies is ever-present in coal mining. This is illustrated by statistics which show that employees in coal mining are more likely to be killed or to incur a nonfatal injury or illness, and their injuries are more likely to be severe, than workers in private industry as a whole. As a result of this constant exposure to harm, coal miners must be highly trained to deal with various emergency scenarios. Some existing underground coal mine training focuses on rote performance of prescribed actions. For example, coal miners are taught when and how to put on self-contained self rescuers, which are respirators that provide 60 minutes of breathable air. Preparation based on inoculation theory principles differs from more traditional training in that it involves teaching trainees to think for themselves rather than simply teaching them how to perform a task or use a safety device. The principles of inoculation theory can be used for emergency safety training for miners as well as for workers in other high-risk industries.

Conducting regular assessments of each miner’s knowledge and skills with respect to lifelines should be a key component of miner safety training. The better prepared miners are to escape from the mine quickly, the better their ultimate chances of survival. Recent NIOSH research reveals several ways miners can be helped to improve their recognition of lifeline tactile signals. | Lifelines with various tactile signals have been required by federal regulation 30 CFR Part 74.380 since 2009. There are now five types of tactile signals on lifelines: directional cones (which indicate the direction to go outby), a coil to indicate a refuge chamber, two sets of double cones to indicate a self-contained, self-rescuer (SCSR) cache, two directional cones in a row to indicate a branch line, and a ball to indicate a personnel door. These signals were instituted to provide an additional navigational tool to help miners escape in the event of an emergency. | Despite the implementation of this new safety feature, miners may not always remember what the signals mean, especially in an emergency situation. It is important miners are able to identify the signals reliably because it could save them a significant amount of time while trying to escape. In addition to telling them which direction is outby, the signals could save them time because, instead of following a branch line to find out where it leads, miners can feel the signal at the beginning of the branch line and immediately know what is available at the end. They can also immediately identify when a line is a branch line as opposed to the main lifeline which leads them directly out of the mine.

Refuge chambers are new devices for underground coal mines that provide approximately 96 h of breathable air, water, food, and supplies in the event of an emergency where miners are unable to escape. Researchers at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) developed a training program to prepare miners for what to expect psychologically and physiologically inside of a refuge chamber. The field tests of this training revealed that it was received very positively by miners and helped impart realistic views about the physical discomforts and psychological stresses of being inside a refuge chamber.

Quality assurance (QA) is a systematic process to monitor and improve clinical laboratory practices. The fundamental components of a laboratory QA program include providing a functional and safe laboratory environment, trained and competent personnel, maintained equipment, adequate supplies and reagents, testing of appropriate specimens, internal monitoring of quality, accurate reporting, and external quality assessments. These components are necessary to provide accurate and precise CD4 T-cell counts, an essential test to evaluate start of and monitor effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy for HIV-infected patients. In recent years, CD4 testing has expanded dramatically in resource-limited settings. Information on a CD4 QA program as described in this article will provide guidelines not only for clinical laboratory staff but also for managers of programs responsible for supporting CD4 testing. All agencies involved in implementing CD4 testing must understand the needs of the laboratory and provide advocacy, guidance, and financial support to established CD4 testing sites and programs. This article describes and explains the procedures that must be put in place to provide reliable CD4 determinations in a variety of settings.