The diagnosis of Ebola virus disease relies on the detection of viral RNA in blood by real-time reverse-transcription PCR. While several of these assays were developed during the unprecedented 2013-2015 Ebola virus disease outbreak in West Africa, few were applied in the field. To compare technical performances and practical aspects of 11 Ebola virus real-time reverse-transcription PCR procedures. We selected the most promising assays using serial dilutions of culture-derived Ebola virus RNA and determined their analytical sensitivity and potential range of quantification using quantified in vitro transcribed RNA; viral load values in the serum of an Ebola virus disease patient obtained with these assays were reported. Finally, ease of use and turnaround times of these kits were evaluated. Commercial assays were at least as sensitive as in-house tests. Five of the former (Altona, Roche, Fast-track Diagnostics, and Life Technologies) were selected for further evaluation. Despite differences in analytical sensitivity and limits of quantification, all of them were suitable for Ebola virus diagnosis and viral load estimation. The Lifetech Lyophilized Ebola Virus (Zaire 2014) assay (Life Technologies) appeared particularly promising, displaying the highest analytical sensitivity and shortest turnaround time, in addition to requiring no reagent freezing. Commercial kits were at least as sensitive as in-house tests and potentially easier to use in the field than the latter. This qualitative comparison of real-time reverse transcription PCR assays may serve as a basis for the design of future Ebola virus disease diagnostics.

The International Consortium for Prevention and Infection Control (ICPIC) organises a biannual conference (ICPIC) on various subjects related to infection prevention, treatment and control. During ICPIC 2015, held in Geneva in June 2015, a full one-day session focused on the 2014–2015 Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak in West Africa. This article is a non-exhaustive compilation of these discussions. It concentrates on lessons learned and imagining a way forward for the communities most affected by the epidemic. The reader can access video recordings of all lectures delivered during this one-day session, as referenced. Topics include the timeline of the international response, linkages between the dynamics of the epidemic and infection prevention and control, the importance of community engagement, and updates on virology, diagnosis, treatment and vaccination issues. The paper also includes discussions from public health, infectious diseases, critical care and infection control experts who cared for patients with EVD in Africa, in Europe, and in the United Sates and were involved in Ebola preparedness in both high- and low-resource settings and countries. This review concludes that too little is known about the pathogenesis and treatment of EVD, therefore basic and applied research in this area are urgently required. Furthermore, it is clear that epidemic preparedness needs to improve globally, in particular through the strengthening of health systems at local and national levels. There is a strong need for culturally sensitive approaches to public health which could be designed and delivered by social scientists and medical professionals working together. As of December 2015, this epidemic killed more than 11,000 people and infected more than 28,000; it has also generated more than 17,000 survivors and orphans, many of whom face somatic and psychological complications. The continued treatment and rehabilitation of these people is a public health priority, which also requires an integration of specific medical and social science approaches, not always available in West Africa.

Rhinoviruses are the most frequent cause of human respiratory infections, and quantitative rhinovirus diagnostic tools are needed for clinical investigations. Although results obtained by real-time reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) assays are frequently converted to viral RNA loads, this presents several limitations regarding accurate virus RNA quantification, particularly given the need to reliably quantify all known rhinovirus genotypes with a single assay. Using an internal extraction control and serial dilutions of an in vitro -transcribed rhinovirus RNA reference standard, we validated a quantitative one-step real-time PCR assay. We then used chimeric rhinovirus genomes with 5′-untranslated regions (5′UTRs) originating from the three rhinovirus species and from one enterovirus to estimate the impact of the 5′UTR diversity. Respiratory specimens from infected patients were then also analyzed. The assay quantification ability ranged from 4.10 to 9.10 log RNA copies/ml, with an estimated error margin of ±10%. This variation was mainly linked to target variability and interassay variability. Taken together, our results indicate that our assay can reliably estimate rhinovirus RNA load, provided that the appropriate error margin is used. In contrast, due to the lack of a universal rhinovirus RNA standard and the variability related to sample collection procedures, accurate absolute rhinovirus RNA quantification in respiratory specimens is currently hardly feasible.

Extended community testing constitutes one of the main strategic pillars in controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. Reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) targeting the SARS-CoV-2 genome on nasopharyngeal swab samples is currently the reference test. While displaying excellent analytical sensitivity and specificity, this test is costly, often requires a substantial turnaround time, and, more importantly, is subject to reagent and other material shortages. To complement this technology, rapid antigen tests have been developed and made available worldwide, allowing cheap, quick, and decentralized SARS-CoV-2 testing. The main drawback of these tests is the reduced sensitivity when RT-PCR is the gold standard. In this study, we evaluate Visby an innovative, portable, easy-to-use RT-PCR point-of-care (POC) diagnostic device. Our retrospective analysis shows that overall, compared to the Cobas 6800 RT-qPCR assay (Roche), this RT-PCR POC technology detects SARS-CoV-2 RNA with 95% sensitivity (95%CI = 86.3–99%) and 100% specificity (95% CI = 80.5–100%). For samples with cycle-threshold values below 31, we observed 100% sensitivity (95% CI = 66.4–100%). While showing an analytical sensitivity slightly below that of a standard RT-qPCR system, the evaluated Visby RT-PCR POC device may prove to be an interesting diagnostic alternative in the COVID-19 pandemic, potentially combining the practical advantages of rapid antigen tests and the robust analytical performances of nucleic acid detection systems.

Human rhinoviruses (HRVs) and enteroviruses (HEVs), two important human pathogens, are non-enveloped, positive-sense RNA viruses of the genus Enterovirus within the family Picornaviridae. Intraspecies recombination is known as a driving force for enterovirus and, to a lesser extent, rhinovirus evolution. Interspecies recombination is much less frequent among circulating strains, and supporting evidence for such recombination is limited to ancestral events, as shown by recent phylogenetic analyses reporting ancient HRV-A/HRV-C, HEV-A/HEV-C and HEV-A/HEV-D recombination mainly at the 5′-untranslated region (5′ UTR)–polyprotein junction. In this study, chimeric genomes were artificially generated using the 5′ UTR from two different clinical HRV-C strains (HRV-Ca and HRV-Cc), an HRV-B strain (HRV-B37) and an HEV-A strain (HEV-A71), and the remaining part of the genome from an HRV-A strain (HRV-A16). Whilst the chimeric viruses were easily propagated in cell culture, the wild-type HRV-A16 retained a replication advantage, both individually and in competition experiments. Assessment of protein synthesis ability did not show a correlation between translation and replication efficiencies. These results reflect the interchangeability of the 5′ UTR, including its functional RNA structural elements implicated in both genome translation and replication among different enterovirus species. The 5′ UTR–polyprotein junction therefore represents a theoretic interspecies recombination breakpoint. This recombination potential is probably restricted by the need for co-infection opportunities and the requirement for the progeny chimera to outcompete the parental genomes’ fitness, explaining the rare occurrence of such events in vivo.