Zika virus (ZIKV) is a mosquito-borne flavivirus that emerged recently as a global health threat, causing a pandemic in the Americas. ZIKV infection mostly causes mild disease, but is linked to devastating congenital birth defects and Guillain-Barré syndrome in adults. The high level of cross-reactivity among flaviviruses and their cocirculation has complicated serological approaches to differentially detect ZIKV and dengue virus (DENV) infections, accentuating the urgent need for a specific and sensitive serological test. We previously generated a ZIKV nonstructural protein 1 (NS1)-specific human monoclonal antibody, which we used to develop an NS1-based competition ELISA. Well-characterized samples from RT-PCR-confirmed patients with Zika and individuals exposed to other flavivirus infections or vaccination were used in a comprehensive analysis to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the NS1 blockade-of-binding (BOB) assay, which was established in laboratories in five countries (Nicaragua, Brazil, Italy, United Kingdom, and Switzerland). Of 158 sera/ plasma from RT-PCR-confirmed ZIKV infections, 145 (91.8%) yielded greater than 50% inhibition. Of 171 patients with primary or secondary DENV infections, 152 (88.9%) scored negative. When the control group was extended to patients infected by other flaviviruses, other viruses, or healthy donors (n = 540), the specificity was 95.9%. We also analyzed longitudinal samples from DENV-immune and DENVnaive ZIKV infections and found inhibition was achieved within 10 d postonset of illness and maintained over time. Thus, the Zika NS1 BOB assay is sensitive, specific, robust, simple, low-cost, and accessible, and can detect recent and past ZIKV infections for surveillance, seroprevalence studies, and intervention trials.is a mosquito-borne flavivirus that is spread via the bite of infected Aedes mosquitoes or by sexual transmission and is responsible for the explosive 2015-2017 epidemic in the Americas. ZIKV infection during pregnancy is linked to devastating birth defects and associated anomalies, designated congenital Zika syndrome (1, 2), whereas in adults, ZIKV infection has been associated with Guillain Barré syndrome (3). Flaviviruses are enveloped RNA viruses containing an ∼11-kb positive-stranded RNA genome that encodes three structural and seven nonstructural proteins. Cells infected by flaviviruses secrete nonstructural protein 1 (NS1), which has multiple roles in immune evasion and pathogenesis (4, 5).Antibody responses generated in response to flavivirus infections are notoriously cross-reactive, representing a significant obstacle for the specific diagnosis of infection using serological assays. Multiple RT-PCR-based assays for the detection of ZIKV RNA are available, but their use is limited to the narrow window when viral RNA is detectable in body fluids. This is highly variable among patients and subject to reporting error, as symptoms are mild, and thus patients may take less notice of the day of onset, but in most cases, it is up to 7 d in serum, ...

BACKGROUNDPassive therapy with convalescent plasma provides an early opportunity to intervene in Ebola virus disease (EVD). Methods for field screening and selection of potential donors and quantifying plasma antibody are needed.STUDY DESIGN AND METHODSRecombinant Ebola virus glycoprotein (EBOV GP) was formatted into immunoglobulin G‐capture, competitive, and double‐antigen bridging enzyme immunoassays (EIAs). EVD survivors in Freetown, Sierra Leone, were recruited as potential plasma donors and assessed locally using sera alone and/or paired sera and oral fluids (ORFs). Uninfected controls comprised unexposed Gambians and communities in Western Area, Sierra Leone. Antibody neutralization in selected sera was measured retrospectively in a pseudotype virus assay.RESULTSA total of 115 potential donors were considered for enrollment: 110 plasma samples were concordantly reactive in the three EIAs; three were concordantly unreactive and two were reactive in two of three EIAs (98.2% agreement; 95% confidence interval [CI], 93.9%‐99.8%). In 88 donors with paired ORF and plasma, G‐capture EIA reactivity correlated well in the two analytes (R2 = 0.795). Plasma and ORF from 44 Gambians were unreactive. ORF samples from 338 of 339 unexposed Western Area community controls were unreactive (specificity, 99.7%; 95% CI, 98.4%‐99.7%); ORF samples from 113 of 116 Kerry Town EVD survivors were reactive (sensitivity, 97.4%; 95% CI, 92.5%‐99.5%). Strong reactivity in G‐capture and/or competitive EIAs identified donors with high plasma EBOV GP antibody levels in the double‐antigen bridging assay, correlating with high levels of neutralizing antibody.CONCLUSIONSIn‐field testing can qualify convalescent donors for providing high‐titer antibody.

We report on the first large-scale assessment of the suitability of oral fluids for detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibody obtained from healthy children attending school. The sample type (gingiva-crevicular fluid, which is a transudate of blood but is not saliva) can be self collected.

BackgroundHealthcare and other front-line workers are at particular risk of infection with Ebola virus (EBOV). Despite the large-scale deployment of international responders, few cases of Ebola virus disease have been diagnosed in this group. Since asymptomatic or pauci-symptomatic infection has been described, it is plausible that infections have occurred in healthcare workers but have escaped being diagnosed. We aimed to assess the prevalence of asymptomatic or pauci-symptomatic infection, and of exposure events, among returned responders to the West African Ebola epidemic 2014–2016.Methods and findingsWe used snowball sampling to identify responders who had returned to the UK or Ireland, and used an online consent and questionnaire to determine their exposure to EBOV and their experience of illness. Oral fluid collection devices were sent and returned by post, and samples were tested using an EBOV IgG capture assay that detects IgG to Ebola glycoprotein. Blood was collected from returnees with reactive samples for further testing. Unexposed UK controls were also recruited.In all, 300 individuals consented, of whom 268 (89.3%) returned an oral fluid sample (OFS). The majority had worked in Sierra Leone in clinical, laboratory, research, and other roles. Fifty-three UK controls consented and provided samples using the same method.Of the returnees, 47 (17.5%) reported that they had had a possible EBOV exposure. Based on their free-text descriptions, using a published risk assessment method, we classified 43 (16%) as having had incidents with risk of Ebola transmission, including five intermediate-risk and one high-risk exposure. Of the returnees, 57 (21%) reported a febrile or diarrhoeal illness in West Africa or within 1 mo of return, of whom 40 (70%) were not tested at the time for EBOV infection.Of the 268 OFSs, 266 were unreactive. Two returnees, who did not experience an illness in West Africa or on return, had OFSs that were reactive on the EBOV IgG capture assay, with similar results on plasma. One individual had no further positive test results; the other had a positive result on a double-antigen bridging assay but not on a competitive assay or on an indirect EBOV IgG ELISA. All 53 controls had non-reactive OFSs. While the participants were not a random sample of returnees, the number participating was high.ConclusionsThis is the first study, to our knowledge, of the prevalence of EBOV infection in international responders. More than 99% had clear negative results. Sera from two individuals had discordant results on the different assays; both were negative on the competitive assay, suggesting that prior infection was unlikely. The finding that a significant proportion experienced “near miss” exposure events, and that most of those who experienced symptoms did not get tested for EBOV at the time, suggests a need to review and standardise protocols for the management of possible exposure to EBOV, and for the management of illness, across organisations that deploy staff to outbreaks.