Analytical and clinical sensitivity of West Nile virus RNA screening and supplemental assays available in 2003
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transfusion-transmitted West Nile virus (WNV) infections were first reported in 2002, which led to rapid development of investigational nucleic acid amplification tests (NAT). A study was conducted to evaluate sensitivities of WNV screening and supplemental NAT assays first employed in 2003. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Twenty-five member-coded panels were distributed to NAT assay manufacturers. Panels included five pedigreed WNV standards (1, 3, 10, 30, and 100 copies/mL), 15 or 16 donor units with very-low-level viremia identified through 2003 screening, and four or five negative control samples. Samples were tested neat in 10 replicates by all assays; for NAT screening assays, 10 replicates were also performed on dilutions consistent with minipool (MP)-NAT. The viral load distribution for 142 MP-NAT yield donations was characterized, relative to the analytical sensitivity of MP-NAT systems. RESULTS: Analytical sensitivities (50% limits of detection [LoD] based on Poisson model of detection of WNV standards) for screening NAT assays ranged from 3.4 to 29 copies per mL; when diluted consistent with MP pool sizes, the 50 percent LoD of screening NAT assays was reduced to 43 to 309 copies per mL. Analytical sensitivity of supplemental assays ranged from 1.5 to 7.7 copies per mL (50% LoD). Detection of RNA in donor units varied consistent with analytical LoD of assays. Detection of low-level viremia after MP dilutions was particularly compromised for seropositive units, probably reflecting lower viral loads in the postseroconversion phase. Based on the viral load distribution of MP-NAT yield donations (median, 3519 copies/mL; range, < 50-690,000), 13 to 24 percent of units had viral loads below the 50 percent LoD of screening NAT assays run in MP-NAT format. CONCLUSION: WNV screening and supplemental assays had generally excellent analytical sensitivity, comparable to human immunodeficiency virus-1 and hepatitis C virus NAT assays. The presence of low-level viremic units during epidemic periods and the impact of MP dilutions on sensitivity, however, suggest the need for further improvements in sensitivity as well as a role for targeted individual-donation NAT in epidemic regions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".