| Literature DB >> 27638946 |
Romy Kerber1, Ralf Krumkamp2, Boubacar Diallo3, Anna Jaeger2, Martin Rudolf1, Simone Lanini4, Joseph Akoi Bore5, Fara Raymond Koundouno5, Beate Becker-Ziaja1, Erna Fleischmann6, Kilian Stoecker6, Silvia Meschi4, Stéphane Mély7, Edmund N C Newman8, Fabrizio Carletti4, Jasmine Portmann9, Misa Korva10, Svenja Wolff11, Peter Molkenthin6, Zoltan Kis12, Anne Kelterbaum11, Anne Bocquin7, Thomas Strecker11, Alexandra Fizet13, Concetta Castilletti4, Gordian Schudt11, Lisa Ottowell8, Andreas Kurth14, Barry Atkinson8, Marlis Badusche1, Angela Cannas4, Elisa Pallasch1, Andrew Bosworth8, Constanze Yue14, Bernadett Pályi12, Heinz Ellerbrok14, Claudia Kohl14, Lisa Oestereich1, Christopher H Logue8, Anja Lüdtke15, Martin Richter14, Didier Ngabo8, Benny Borremans16, Dirk Becker11, Sophie Gryseels16, Saïd Abdellati17, Tine Vermoesen17, Eeva Kuisma8, Annette Kraus18, Britta Liedigk1, Piet Maes19, Ruth Thom8, Sophie Duraffour19, Sandra Diederich20, Julia Hinzmann14, Babak Afrough8, Johanna Repits21, Marc Mertens20, Inês Vitoriano8, Amadou Bah22, Andreas Sachse14, Jan Peter Boettcher14, Stephanie Wurr1, Sabrina Bockholt1, Andreas Nitsche14, Tatjana Avšič Županc10, Marc Strasser9, Giuseppe Ippolito4, Stephan Becker11, Herve Raoul23, Miles W Carroll24, Hilde De Clerck25, Michel Van Herp25, Armand Sprecher25, Lamine Koivogui26, N'Faly Magassouba27, Sakoba Keïta28, Patrick Drury29, Cèline Gurry29, Pierre Formenty29, Jürgen May2, Martin Gabriel1, Roman Wölfel6, Stephan Günther1, Antonino Di Caro4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A unit of the European Mobile Laboratory (EMLab) consortium was deployed to the Ebola virus disease (EVD) treatment unit in Guéckédou, Guinea, from March 2014 through March 2015.Entities:
Keywords: Ebola virus disease; Filovirus; Guinea; epidemic; malaria; mobile laboratory
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27638946 PMCID: PMC5050480 DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiw269
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Infect Dis ISSN: 0022-1899 Impact factor: 5.226
Characteristics of Individuals Included in the Analysis
| Characteristic | EVD Suspected Cases in Hospital | Community Deaths | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | EBOV RT-PCR Positive | EBOV RT-PCR Negative | Overall | EBOV RT-PCR Positive | EBOV RT-PCR Negative | |
| Individuals | 2178/2178 (100) | 1231/2178 (57) | 947/2178 (43) | 563 | 281/563 (50) | 282/563 (50) |
| Female sex | 1135/2157 (53) | 645/1228 (53) | 490/929 (53) | 260/545 (48) | 136/271 (50) | 124/274 (45) |
| Age, y, median (IQR) | 30 (18–44)a | 30 (19–45)b | 30 (18–42)c | 37 (25–55)d | 35 (23–53)e | 40 (25–56)f |
| Malaria RDT positive | 541/1937 (28) | 261/1091 (24) | 280/846 (33) | Not tested | Not tested | Not tested |
| Fatal outcome | 769/2049 (38) | 719/1205 (60) | 50/844 (6) | 563 (100) | 281 (100) | 282 (100) |
Data are proportion of individuals with the characteristic/no. evaluated (%), unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviations: EBOV, Ebola virus; EVD, Ebola virus disease; IQR, interquartile range; RDT, rapid diagnostic test; RT-PCR, reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction.
a Data are for 2153 observations.
b Data are for 1225 observations.
c Data are for 928 observations.
d Data are for 521 observations.
e Data are for 252 observations.
f Data are for 269 observations.
Figure 1.Frequency of patients tested by Ebola virus (EBOV) reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), case-fatality ratios (CFRs), cycle threshold (Ct) values, and malaria parasite coinfection rate over time. A, EBOV RT-PCR results are shown for 2178 patients attending an Ebola virus disease (EVD) treatment unit (ETU; upper panel) and 563 patients who died in their communities (lower panel), by week of the deployment period. For patients with EVD who were treated at an ETU, the CFR is shown in the upper panel. B, Ct values on admission and malaria parasite coinfection rate for patients with EVD who were treated at an ETU. Abbreviation: RDT, rapid diagnostic test.
Figure 2.Age distribution for patients tested by Ebola virus (EBOV) reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Results are shown for 2153 patients attending an Ebola virus disease (EVD) treatment unit (A) and 521 patients who died in their communities (B), by age category.
Figure 3.Proportion of patients with Ebola virus disease (EVD) and/or malaria, as well as case-fatality ratios (CFRs) for EVD, according to age and malaria parasite coinfection status. A, The relative frequencies of hospitalized patients with positive results of Ebola virus (EBOV) reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) analysis and/or malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are shown. The CFR refers to EVD cases irrespective of malaria parasite coinfection. B, CFR depending on age group and malaria parasite coinfection status. The number of fatalities and total number of patients per age group are shown below the graph. The data set used to generate the graph (for 1047 patients) corresponds to the data set used to calculate the regression models in Tables 2 and 3.
Crude (Unadjusted) Logistic Regression Analysis of the Association Between a Fatal Outcome and Both Age and Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) Result Among 1047 Patients With Ebola Virus Disease
| Variable | Fatal Cases/Total Cases (%) | Crude Model, OR for Fatal Outcome (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ct of EBOV RT-PCR (increasing, continuous) | 602/1047 (57.5) | 0.7 (.7–.7) | <.001 |
| Age category, y | |||
| 0–4 | 42/55 (76.4) | 2.9 (1.4–5.9) | .004 |
| 5–14 | 65/123 (52.8) | 1 (Reference) | |
| 15–44 | 322/603 (53.4) | 1.0 (.7–1.5) | .91 |
| ≥45 | 173/266 (65.0) | 1.6 (1.1–2.6) | .02 |
| Malaria RDT result | |||
| Negative | 452/798 (56.6) | 1 (Reference) | |
| Positive | 150/249 (60.2) | 1.2 (.9–1.5) | .32 |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; Ct, cycle threshold; EBOV, Ebola virus; OR, odds ratio; RT-PCR, reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction.
Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis of the Association Between Age and Fatal Outcome, by Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) Result, and the Effect of Malaria per Age Group (Interaction) Among 1047 Patients With Ebola Virus Disease
| Variable | Malaria RDT Negative | Malaria RDT Positive | Interaction | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full Model, OR for Fatal Outcome (95% CI) | Full Model, OR for Fatal Outcome (95% CI) | Full Model, OR for Fatal Outcome (95% CI) | ||||
| Ct of EBOV RT-PCR (increasing, continuous) | 0.7 (.7–.7) | <.001 | 0.7 (.7–.7) | <.001 | 0.7 (.7–.7) | <.001 |
| Age category, y | ||||||
| 0–4 | 14.3 (3.5–58.5) | <.001 | 12.3 (3.2–47.7) | <.001 | 0.9 (.2–4.8)a | .86 |
| 5–14 | 1 (Reference) | 4.2 (1.7–10.1) | .002 | 4.2 (1.7–10.1)a | .002 | |
| 15–44 | 3.0 (1.5–5.9) | .002 | 2.6 (1.2–5.9) | .02 | 0.9 (.5–1.5)a | .63 |
| ≥45 | 5.0 (2.4–10.5) | <.001 | 3.9 (1.5–10.2) | .006 | 0.8 (.3–1.7)a | .52 |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; Ct, cycle threshold; EBOV, Ebola virus; OR, odds ratio; RT-PCR, reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction.
a Estimates of the corresponding interaction terms are as follows: age 0–4 years: OR, 0.2 (95% CI, .1–1.4; P = .11); age 5–14 years: OR, 1 (reference); age 15–44 years: OR, 0.2 (95% CI, .1–.6; P = .003); and age ≥45 years: OR, 0.2 (95% CI, .1–.6; P = .006).
Figure 4.Distribution of cycle threshold (Ct) values on admission to hospital for patients who died of or survived Ebola virus disease (EVD) and for individuals who died of EVD in the community. Arrows and horizontal bars above the histograms indicate medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs), respectively.
Figure 5.Case-fatality ratios (CFRs) among hospitalized patients with Ebola virus disease (EVD), according to cycle threshold (Ct) category. The Ct values for the first Ebola virus reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction–positive blood sample from 2527 patients were included in the analysis.