The recent outbreak of novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) causing COVID-19 disease spreads rapidly in the world. Rapid and early detection of SARS-CoV-2 facilitates early intervention and prevents the disease spread. Here, we present an All-In-One Dual CRISPR-Cas12a (AIOD-CRISPR) assay for one-pot, ultrasensitive, and visual SARS-CoV-2 detection. By targeting SARS-CoV-2’s nucleoprotein gene, two CRISPR RNAs without protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) site limitation are introduced to develop the AIOD-CRISPR assay and detect the nucleic acids with a sensitivity of few copies. We validate the assay by using COVID-19 clinical swab samples and obtain consistent results with RT-PCR assay. Furthermore, a low-cost hand warmer (~$0.3) is used as an incubator of the AIOD-CRISPR assay to detect clinical samples within 20 min, enabling an instrument-free, visual SARS-CoV-2 detection at the point of care. Thus, our method has the significant potential to provide a rapid, sensitive, one-pot point-of-care assay for SARS-CoV-2.

No abstract

Quantifying severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in clinical samples is crucial for early diagnosis and timely medical treatment of coronavirus disease 2019. Here, we describe a digital warm-start CRISPR (dWS-CRISPR) assay for sensitive quantitative detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical samples. The dWS-CRISPR assay is initiated at above 50 °C and overcomes undesired premature target amplification at room temperature, enabling accurate and reliable digital quantification of SARS-CoV-2. By targeting SARS-CoV-2's nucleoprotein gene, the dWS-CRISPR assay is able to detect down to 5 copies/μl SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the chip. It is clinically validated by quantitatively determining 32 clinical swab samples and three clinical saliva samples. Moreover, it has been demonstrated to directly detect SARS-CoV-2 in heat-treated saliva samples without RNA extraction. Thus, the dWS-CRISPR method, as a sensitive and reliable CRISPR assay, facilitates accurate SARS-CoV-2 detection toward digitized quantification.

The increase in the prevalence and impact of infections caused by carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae is a global health concern. Therefore, rapid and accurate methods to detect these organisms in any clinical microbiology laboratory, including those in resource-limited settings, are essential to prevent and contain their spread. It is also important to differentiate between serine-and metaldependent carbapenemases elaborated by carbapenemase-producing isolates for epidemiologic, infection control and prevention, and therapeutic purposes. Here, we describe the development and evaluation of the EDTA-modified carbapenem inactivation method (eCIM), an assay for discriminating between serine-and metaldependent (i.e., metallo-␤-lactamases [MBLs]) carbapenemases when used in conjunction with the modified carbapenem inactivation method (mCIM). The eCIM had an overall sensitivity and specificity of 100% and was adopted by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute as a method to use in combination with the mCIM to identify MBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae.

BackgroundInfections caused by Mycobacterium abscessus group strains are usually resistant to multiple antimicrobials and challenging to treat worldwide. We describe the risk factors, treatment, and clinical outcomes of patients in 2 large academic medical centers in the United States.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of hospitalized adults with a positive culture for M. abscessus in Miami, Florida (January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2014). Demographics, comorbidities, the source of infection, antimicrobial susceptibilities, and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Early treatment failure was defined as death and/or infection relapse characterized either by persistent positive culture for M. abscessus within 12 weeks of treatment initiation and/or lack of radiographic improvement.ResultsOne hundred eight patients were analyzed. The mean age was 50.81 ± 21.03 years, 57 (52.8%) were females, and 41 (38%) Hispanics. Eleven (10.2%) had end-stage renal disease, 34 (31.5%) were on immunosuppressive therapy, and 40% had chronic lung disease. Fifty-nine organisms (54.6%) were isolated in respiratory sources, 21 (19.4%) in blood, 10 (9.2%) skin and soft tissue, and 9 (8.3%) intra-abdominal. Antimicrobial susceptibility reports were available for 64 (59.3%) of the patients. Most of the isolates were susceptible to clarithromycin, amikacin, and tigecycline (93.8%, 93.8%, and 89.1%, respectively). None of the isolates were susceptible to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, and only 1 (1.6%) was susceptible to ciprofloxacin. Thirty-six (33.3%) patients early failed treatment; of those, 17 (15.7%) died while hospitalized. On multivariate analysis, risk factors significantly associated with early treatment failure were disseminated infection (odds ratio [OR], 11.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53–81.69; P = .04), acute kidney injury (OR, 6.55; 95% CI, 2.4–31.25; P = .018), organ transplantation (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 2.7–23.1; P = .005), immunosuppressive therapy (OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.6–21.4; P = .002), intravenous amikacin treatment (OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 0.9–21; P = .04), clarithromycin resistance (OR,79.5; 95% CI, 6.2–3717.1, P < .001), and presence of prosthetic device (OR, 5.43; 95% CI, 1.57–18.81; P = .008). Receiving macrolide treatment was found to be protective against early treatment failure (OR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.002–1.8; P = .04).ConclusionsOur cohort of 108 M. abscessus complex isolates in Miami, Florida, showed an in-hospital mortality of 15.7%. Most infections were respiratory. Clarithromycin and amikacin were the most likely agents to be susceptible in vitro. Resistance to fluoroquinolone and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole was highly common. Macrolide resistance, immunosuppression, and renal disease were significantly associated with early treatment failure.

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has become a public health emergency and widely spread around the world. Rapid, accurate and early diagnosis of COVID-19...

No abstract

Ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) may improve outcomes among patients with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections compared to those with conventional therapies. However, CAZ-AVI’s cost-effectiveness is unknown. We used a decision analytic model to estimate the health and economic consequences of CAZ-AVI-based therapy compared to colistin-based therapy (COL) for a hypothetical cohort of patients with CRE pneumonia or bacteremia over a 5-year horizon. Model inputs were from published sources and included CRE mortality with COL (41%), CAZ-AVI’s absolute risk reduction in CRE mortality (23%), daily cost of CAZ-AVI ($926), risk of nephrotoxicity with COL (42%), and probability of discharge to long-term care (LTC) following CRE infection (56%). Outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER; dollars/QALY). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed and ICERs were compared to willingness-to-pay standards of $100,000/QALY and $150,000/QALY. In the base case, CAZ-AVI had an ICER of $95,000/QALY. At a $100,000/QALY threshold, results were sensitive to a number of variables, including the probability and cost of LTC, quality of life following CRE infection, CAZ-AVI’s absolute risk reduction in mortality, all-cause mortality, daily cost of CAZ-AVI, and health care costs after CRE infection. The ICER did not exceed $150,000/QALY after all model inputs were varied across a wide range of plausible values. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, CAZ-AVI was the optimal strategy in 59% and 99% of simulations at $100,000/QALY and $150,000/QALY thresholds, respectively. In conclusion, CAZ-AVI is a cost-effective treatment for CRE bacteremia and pneumonia based on accepted willingness to pay standards in the United States.