Background: The ideal severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARs-CoV-2) testing method would be accurate and also be patient-performed to reduce exposure to healthcare workers. The aim of this study was to compare patient-performed testing based on a morning saliva sample with the current standard testing method, healthcare worker-collected sampling via a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS). Methods: This was a prospective single center study which recruited 217 asymptomatic adult male participants in a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) quarantine center who had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 8–10 days prior to isolation. Paired NPS and saliva specimens were collected and processed within 5 hours of sample collection. Real time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) targeting Envelope (E) and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) genes was performed and the results were compared. Results: Overall, 160 of the 217 (74%) participants tested positive for COVID-19 based on saliva, NPS, or both testing methods. The detection rate for SARS-CoV-2 was higher in saliva compared to NPS testing (93.1%, 149/160 vs 52.5%, 84/160, P < .001). The concordance between the 2 tests was 45.6% (virus was detected in both saliva and NPS in 73/160), whereas 47.5% were discordant (87/160 tested positive for 1 whereas negative for the other). The cycle threshold (Ct) values for E and RdRp genes were significantly lower in saliva specimens compared to NP swab specimens. Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate that saliva is a better alternative specimen for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Taking into consideration, the simplicity of specimen collection, shortage of PPE and the transmissibility of the virus, saliva could enable self-collection for an accurate SARS-CoV-2 surveillance testing.

Background. The spread of carbapenem-resistantA. baumannii(CrAb) is gaining worldwide attention. The spread of this pathogen is largely due to its ability to acquire various resistance genes of intrinsic and extrinsic origins that confer unpredictable susceptibility toβ-lactams. The aim of this study was to analyzeβ-lactamase genetic compositions of CrAb in Malaysia.Methods. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) was carried out on 13 CrAb isolates from clinical samples in Malaysia from 2011 to 2016.Results. Endotracheal aspirate was the dominant clinical sample source (n = 6), and only one isolate was obtained from wound swab. A total of 6 sequence types (STs) of the Oxford scheme were identified, including 4 reported STs and 2 novel STs. Eleven isolates were classified into clonal complex 92 (CC92/ICII), among which ST195 and ST208 were the most prevalent STs. All 13 CrAb isolates harbored multipleβ-lactamase genes.bla_OXA-23(n = 13) andbla_OXA-66(n = 11) were the dominant carbapenemase gene families found in these isolates. All isolates harborbla_ADC,bla_OXA-51-like, andbla_OXA-23-likegenes.bla_TEM(n = 7),bla_NDM-1(n = 3),bla_CARB-8(n = 1), andbla_PER-3(n = 1) are amongst otherβ-lactamase genes found in this study. ISAba1was found upstream tobla_OXA-23(n = 13),bla_OXA-66(n = 1), andbla_ADC(n = 11). Allbla_NDM-1isolates had ISAba125(mobile genetic element) upstream to the genes. All isolates were positive for Tn2006/2008and Tn2009but were negative for Tn2007.Conclusion. Most of the isolates were grouped under the CC92 clonal complex which belongs to international clonal lineage 2. These findings predict that carriage of carbapenem-resistant genes possibly constitutes the underlying basis of high level of international clone II prevalence. Therefore, molecular surveillance and antimicrobial stewardship are essential in implementing policies to prevent and control the spread of CrAb in hospital settings.

Introduction. Leptospirosis is an acute febrile illness, known for its protean clinical manifestations and the challenge in differentiating from other infectious diseases. Standardized confirmatory test is antibody dependent and not accessible by the suburban community. This study measures efficiency of an immune-chromatographic assay, Leptocheck WB, in detecting acute leptospirosis. Methods. A total of 142 sera were used for kit evaluation. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated by comparing rapid kit results with gold standard laboratory, microscopic agglutination test (MAT). Results. We found this rapid kit to have a sensitivity and specificity of 66.6% and 78.9%, respectively, whereas the PPV and NPV of the kit appeared to be 73.3% and 73.2%, respectively. Discussion. Test efficiency of this rapid kit is reasonable. It is specific in detecting leptospiral antibody and assures clinician of accurate diagnosis by having higher PPV and NPV. It is prompt and efficient in comparison with conventional methods in assisting differential diagnosis. High sensitivity and specificity leptospirosis rapid test is indeed a crucial measure to assist the diagnosis of acute undifferentiated febrile illnesses.

An optimal clinical specimen for accurate detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) by minimizing the usage of consumables and reduce hazard exposure to healthcare workers is an urgent priority. The diagnostic performance of SARS‐CoV‐2 detection between healthcare worker‐collected nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal (NP + OP) swabs and patient performed self‐collected random saliva was assessed. Paired NP + OP swabs and random saliva were collected and processed within 48 h of specimen collection from two cohort studies which recruited 562 asymptomatic adult candidates. Real‐time reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction targeting Open reading frame 1a (ORF1a) and nucleocapsid (N) genes was performed and the results were compared. Overall, 65 of 562 (28.1%) candidates tested positive for COVID‐19 based on random saliva, NP + OP swabs, or both testing techniques. The detection rate of SARS‐CoV‐2 was higher in random saliva compared to NP + OP testing (92.3%; 60/65 vs. 73.8%; 48/65; p < .05). The estimated sensitivity and specificity of random saliva were higher than NP + OP swabs (95.0; 99.9 vs. 72.2; 99.4). The C_t values of ORF1a and N genes were significantly lower in random saliva compared to NP + OP swabs specimens. Our findings demonstrate that random saliva is an alternative diagnostic specimen for the detection of SARS‐CoV‐2. Self‐collected random oropharyngeal saliva is a valuable specimen that provides accurate SARS‐CoV‐2 surveillance testing of a community.

Candida vulturna is a newly emerging candida species belong to Candida haemulonii species complex of Metschnikowiaceae family. Numerous clinical samples have been reported to isolate C. vulturna since discovery. We report a case of catheter related blood stream infection in which C. vulturna was isolated from blood in patient after prolong antibiotic therapy for recurrent infection of retroperitoneal cyst. The blood isolate was identified to species level by molecular assay targeting D1/D2 regions of 26s rDNA gene. The patient improved with administration of intravenous micafungin despite lack of antifungal susceptibility breakpoints.

Introduction. Co-infection of leptospirosis–malaria is not uncommon due to their overlapping geographical distribution in the tropics. Aim. This study aimed to describe and compare the demographic, clinical and laboratory features of leptospirosis–malaria co-infection (LMCI) against leptospirosis mono-infection (LMI) in Peninsular Malaysia. Methodology. Data of patients admitted to various hospitals in Peninsular Malaysia from 2011 to 2014 diagnosed with leptospirosis in our laboratory were obtained from their admission records. Co-infections with malaria were identified via blood film for malaria parasites (BFMP). Description with inferential statistics analysis and multiple logistic regressions were used to distinguish features between dual and mono-infections. Results. Of 111 leptospirosis-positive patients, 26 (23.4 %) tested positive for malaria. Co-infections were predominant among male patients with a mean age of 33 years and were prevalent among immigrant populations who had settled in high-density suburban areas. Chills and rigor with splenomegaly were the only significant distinguishing clinical features of LMCI while leukocytosis and raised transaminases were significant laboratory parameters. Only chills and rigor demonstrated a predictive value for LMCI from analysis of multiple logistic regressions. No death was attributed to co-infection in this study, in contrast to LMI (11.8 %, n=10). Conclusion. The significant prevalence of LMCI found in this study with overlapping demographic, clinical and laboratory parameters makes diagnosis of co-infection challenging. It is essential to evaluate co-infection in endemic areas. Strengthened awareness of LMCI, comprehensive diagnostic services and further prospective studies are warranted.