No abstract

No abstract

Smallpox, caused by Variola virus (VARV), was eradicated in 1980; however, VARV bioterrorist threats still exist, necessitating readily available therapeutics. Current preparedness activities recognize the importance of oral antivirals and recommend therapeutics with different mechanisms of action. Monkeypox virus (MPXV) is closely related to VARV, causing a highly similar clinical human disease, and can be used as a surrogate for smallpox antiviral testing. The prairie dog MPXV model has been characterized and used to study the efficacy of antipoxvirus therapeutics, including recently approved TPOXX (tecovirimat). Brincidofovir (BCV; CMX001) has shown antiviral activity against double-stranded DNA viruses, including poxviruses. To determine the exposure of BCV following oral administration to prairie dogs, a pharmacokinetics (PK) study was performed. Analysis of BCV plasma concentrations indicated variability, conceivably due to the outbred nature of the animals. To determine BCV efficacy in the MPXV prairie dog model, groups of animals were intranasally challenged with 9 × 105 plaque-forming units (PFU; 90% lethal dose [LD90]) of MPXV on inoculation day 0 (ID0). Animals were divided into groups based on the first day of BCV treatment relative to inoculation day (ID–1, ID0, or ID1). A trend in efficacy was noted dependent upon treatment initiation (57% on ID–1, 43% on ID0, and 29% on ID1) but was lower than demonstrated in other animal models. Analysis of the PK data indicated that BCV plasma exposure (maximum concentration [Cmax]) and the time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUClast) were lower than in other animal models administered the same doses, indicating that suboptimal BCV exposure may explain the lower protective effect on survival. IMPORTANCE Preparedness activities against highly transmissible viruses with high mortality rates have been highlighted during the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Smallpox, caused by variola virus (VARV) infection, is highly transmissible, with an estimated 30% mortality. Through an intensive vaccination campaign, smallpox was declared eradicated in 1980, and routine smallpox vaccination of individuals ceased. Today's current population has little/no immunity against VARV. If smallpox were to reemerge, the worldwide results would be devastating. Recent FDA approval of one smallpox antiviral (tecovirimat) was a successful step in biothreat preparedness; however, orthopoxviruses can become resistant to treatment, suggesting the need for multiple therapeutics. Our paper details the efficacy of the investigational smallpox drug brincidofovir in a monkeypox virus (MPXV) animal model. Since brincidofovir has not been tested in vivo against smallpox, studies with the related virus MPXV are critical in understanding whether it would be protective in the event of a smallpox outbreak.

No abstract

Monkeypox, caused by a zoonotic orthopoxvirus, is endemic in Central and West Africa. Monkeypox has been sporadically reported in the Republic of the Congo. During March 22–April 5, 2017, we investigated 43 suspected human monkeypox cases. We interviewed suspected case-patients and collected dried blood strips and vesicular and crust specimens (active lesions), which we tested for orthopoxvirus antibodies by ELISA and monkeypox virus and varicella zoster virus DNA by PCR. An ecologic investigation was conducted around Manfouété, and specimens from 105 small mammals were tested for anti-orthopoxvirus antibodies or DNA. Among the suspected human cases, 22 met the confirmed, probable, and possible case definitions. Only 18 patients had available dried blood strips; 100% were IgG positive, and 88.9% (16/18) were IgM positive. Among animals, only specimens from Cricetomys giant pouched rats showed presence of orthopoxvirus antibodies, adding evidence to this species’ involvement in the transmission and maintenance of monkeypox virus in nature.

IMPORTANCEAs self-collected home antigen tests become widely available, a better understanding of their performance during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection is needed. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the diagnostic performance of home antigen tests compared with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and viral culture by days from illness onset, as well as user acceptability. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This prospective cohort study was conducted from January to May 2021 in San Diego County, California, and metropolitan Denver, Colorado. The convenience sample included adults and children with RT-PCR-confirmed infection who used self-collected home antigen tests for 15 days and underwent at least 1 nasopharyngeal swab for RT-PCR, viral culture, and sequencing. EXPOSURES SARS-CoV-2 infection. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was the daily sensitivity of home antigen tests to detect RT-PCR-confirmed cases. Secondary outcomes included the daily percentage of antigen test, RT-PCR, and viral culture results that were positive, and antigen test sensitivity compared with same-day RT-PCR and cultures. Antigen test use errors and acceptability were assessed for a subset of participants. RESULTS This study enrolled 225 persons with RT-PCR-confirmed infection (median [range] age, 29 [1-83] years; 117 female participants [52%]; 10 [4%] Asian, 6 [3%] Black or African American, 50 [22%] Hispanic or Latino, 3 [1%] Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 145[64%] White, and 11 [5%] multiracial individuals) who completed 3044 antigen tests and 642 nasopharyngeal swabs. Antigen test sensitivity was 50% (95% CI, 45%-55%) during the infectious period, 64% (95% CI, 56%-70%) compared with same-day RT-PCR, and 84% (95% CI, 75%-90%) compared with same-day cultures. Antigen test sensitivity peaked 4 days after illness onset at 77% (95% CI, 69%-83%). Antigen test sensitivity improved with a second antigen test 1 to 2 days later, particularly early in the infection. Six days after illness onset, antigen test result positivity was 61% (95% CI, 53%-68%). Almost all (216 [96%]) surveyed individuals reported that they would be more likely to get tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection if home antigen tests were available over the counter. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThe results of this cohort study of home antigen tests suggest that sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 was moderate compared with RT-PCR and high compared with viral culture. The results also suggest that symptomatic individuals with an initial negative home antigen test result for SARS-CoV-2 infection should test again 1 to 2 days later because test sensitivity peaked several days after illness onset and improved with repeated testing.

Repeating the BinaxNOW antigen test for SARS-CoV-2 by two groups of readers within 30 minutes resulted in high concordance (98.9%) in 2,110 encounters. BinaxNOW test sensitivity was 77.2% (258/334) compared to real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. Same day antigen testing did not significantly improve test sensitivity while specificity remained high.

No abstract