Rapid inactivation of Ebola virus (EBOV) is crucial for high-throughput testing of clinical samples in low-. In response to this outbreak, the international community has deployed an increasing number of Ebola diagnostic laboratories into the main West African countries affected (Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone). Rapid diagnosis of EVD in humans is critical in the management of this disease in outbreak situations, as it allows prompt isolation and the chance to provide the best supportive care to patients, which helps reduce the overall infection rate and break the transmission chain.The preferred clinical sample for testing for Ebola virus (EBOV), an enveloped negative-sense single-strand RNA virus, is EDTA-blood, serum, or plasma with the primary diagnostic technology being real-time PCR (2). Other sample types, such as swabs or urine, may also be received by a laboratory. EBOV is designated in the United Kingdom by the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) as a hazard group 4 pathogen that must be handled under containment level (CL) 4 standards (biosafety level 4 [BSL4] in other countries). As such stringent laboratory infrastructure and containment procedures are required to handle viable EBOV material, only a few laboratories in Europe and elsewhere are suitably equipped (3). Within the timelines and budgets available, it has been impractical to create this laboratory infrastructure in West Africa, and therefore diagnostic laboratories have relied on methods that rapidly inactivate EBOV prior to routine processing and testing of samples by PCR.Laboratory methods of EBOV inactivation include gamma irradiation (4), nanoemulsion (5), photoinducible alkylating agents (6), and UV radiation (7), but these methods are primarily used for research purposes and may not be practicable in an outbreak situation that is likely to involve a high number of samples but reduced capability for handling and manipulation. In this context, any inactivation method must also be compatible with the EBOV PCR diagnostic approach.The CDC recommends Triton X-100 and heat treatment for 1 h for diagnostic samples containing hemorrhagic fever viruses (8), and this method has been adopted by many laboratories for handling of samples that may contain EBOV (9). Heating (alone or with acetic acid) for 1 h at 60°C has also been shown to reduce the titer of EBOV (10). Other guidelines can be nonspecific, specifying only the need for inactivation but not suggesting how (11) or suggesting generic use of denaturing/lysis buffers and/or heat (12). In the United Kingdom, the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens guidelines state that samples from confirmed cases may be processed in a containment level 2 laboratory using routine autoanalyzers if a containment level 4 laboratory is not available and provided specific procedures are followed (13). Within these guidelines, which encompass the application of multiple clinical tests, there is no specific requirement to inactivate EBOV (or other viral hemorrhagic fever agents) within a sa...

No abstract

There are no widely available vaccines or antiviral drugs capable of protecting against infection with Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (VEEV), although an adenovirus vector expressing VEEV structural proteins protects mice from challenge with VEEV and is potentially a vaccine suitable for human use. This work examines whether alpha interferon (IFN-α) could act as an adjuvant for the adenovirus-based vaccine. IFN-α was either expressed by a plasmid linked to the adenovirus vaccine or encoded by a separate adenovirus vector administered as a mixture with the vaccine. In contrast to previous reports with other vaccines, the presence of IFN-α reduced the antibody response to VEEV. When IFN-α was encoded by adenovirus, the lack of a VEEV-specific response was accompanied by an increase in the immune response to the adenovirus vector. IFN-α also plays a direct role in defence against virus infection, inducing the expression of a large number of antiviral proteins. Adenovirus-delivered IFN-α protected mice from VEEV disease when administered 24 h prior to challenge, but not when administered 6 h post-challenge, suggesting that up to 24 h is required for the development of the IFN-mediated antiviral response.

No abstract

No abstract