Latent tuberculosis: which test in which situation?

Detection of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is a cost-effective procedure in patients at high risk of developing tuberculosis later and who could benefit from preventive treatment. The commonest situation where screening is indicated is the search for infected contacts of an index case with pulmonary tuberculosis. As a screening procedure the current tendency is to replace the time-honoured tuberculin skin test by one of the new blood tests measuring the release of interferon gamma by sensitised T lymphocytes after stimulation by specific peptides from M. tuberculosis. The main advantage of the new tests is the absence of interference with BCG and non-tuberculous mycobacteria, which confers high specificity on the test. This allows a more selective choice of persons for whom preventive treatment is indicated. Some controversial issues remain, such as sensitivity in children and immunocompromised subjects, the predictive value of the blood test and interpretation of possible changes in test results over time. The technical aspects required for performance of the tests must be considered.

Streamlining the medication process improves safety in the intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Multiple interventions were made to optimize the medication process in our intensive care unit (ICU). 1 Transcriptions from the medical order form to the administration plan were eliminated by merging both into a single document; 2 the new form was built in a logical sequence and was highly structured to promote completeness and standardization of information; 3 frequently used drug names, approved units, and fixed routes were pre-printed; 4 physicians and nurses were trained with regard to the correct use of the new form. This study was aimed at evaluating the impact of these interventions on clinically significant types of medication errors. METHODS: Eight types of medication errors were measured by a prospective chart review before and after the interventions in the ICU of a public tertiary care hospital. We used an interrupted time-series design to control the secular trends. RESULTS: Over 85 days, 9298 lines of drug prescription and/or administration to 294 patients, corresponding to 754 patient-days were collected and analysed for the three series before and three series following the intervention. Global error rate decreased from 4.95 to 2.14% (-56.8%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The safety of the medication process in our ICU was improved by simple and inexpensive interventions. In addition to the optimization of the prescription writing process, the documentation of intravenous preparation, and the scheduling of administration, the elimination of the transcription in combination with the training of users contributed to reducing errors and carried an interesting potential to increase safety.

Results of An International Study of Quantitative BCR/ABL Assays Using Defined RNA Samples

Molecular monitoring of BCR/ABL transcripts by real time quantitative reverse transcription PCR (qRT-PCR) is an essential technique for clinical management of patients with BCR/ABL-positive CML and ALL. Though quantitative BCR/ABL assays are performed in hundreds of laboratories worldwide, results among these laboratories cannot be reliably compared due to heterogeneity in test methods, data analysis, reporting, and lack of quantitative standards. Recent efforts towards standardization have been limited in scope. Aliquots of RNA were sent to clinical test centers worldwide in order to evaluate methods and reporting for e1a2, b2a2, and b3a2 transcript levels using their own qRT-PCR assays. Total RNA was isolated from tissue culture cells that expressed each of the different BCR/ABL transcripts. Serial log dilutions were prepared, ranging from 100 to 10-5, in RNA isolated from HL60 cells. Laboratories performed 5 independent qRT-PCR reactions for each sample type at each dilution. In addition, 15 qRT-PCR reactions of the 10-3 b3a2 RNA dilution were run to assess reproducibility within and between laboratories. Participants were asked to run the samples following their standard protocols and to report cycle threshold (Ct), quantitative values for BCR/ABL and housekeeping genes, and ratios of BCR/ABL to housekeeping genes for each sample RNA. Thirty-seven (n=37) participants have submitted qRT-PCR results for analysis (36, 37, and 34 labs generated data for b2a2, b3a2, and e1a2, respectively). The limit of detection for this study was defined as the lowest dilution that a Ct value could be detected for all 5 replicates. For b2a2, 15, 16, 4, and 1 lab(s) showed a limit of detection at the 10-5, 10-4, 10-3, and 10-2 dilutions, respectively. For b3a2, 20, 13, and 4 labs showed a limit of detection at the 10-5, 10-4, and 10-3 dilutions, respectively. For e1a2, 10, 21, 2, and 1 lab(s) showed a limit of detection at the 10-5, 10-4, 10-3, and 10-2 dilutions, respectively. Log %BCR/ABL ratio values provided a method for comparing results between the different laboratories for each BCR/ABL dilution series. Linear regression analysis revealed concordance among the majority of participant data over the 10-1 to 10-4 dilutions. The overall slope values showed comparable results among the majority of b2a2 (mean=0.939; median=0.9627; range (0.399 - 1.1872)), b3a2 (mean=0.925; median=0.922; range (0.625 - 1.140)), and e1a2 (mean=0.897; median=0.909; range (0.5174 - 1.138)) laboratory results (Fig. 1-3)). Thirty-four (n=34) out of the 37 laboratories reported Ct values for all 15 replicates and only those with a complete data set were included in the inter-lab calculations. Eleven laboratories either did not report their copy number data or used other reporting units such as nanograms or cell numbers; therefore, only 26 laboratories were included in the overall analysis of copy numbers. The median copy number was 348.4, with a range from 15.6 to 547,000 copies (approximately a 4.5 log difference); the median intra-lab %CV was 19.2% with a range from 4.2% to 82.6%. While our international performance evaluation using serially diluted RNA samples has reinforced the fact that heterogeneity exists among clinical laboratories, it has also demonstrated that performance within a laboratory is overall very consistent. Accordingly, the availability of defined BCR/ABL RNAs may facilitate the validation of all phases of quantitative BCR/ABL analysis and may be extremely useful as a tool for monitoring assay performance. Ongoing analyses of these materials, along with the development of additional control materials, may solidify consensus around their application in routine laboratory testing and possible integration in worldwide efforts to standardize quantitative BCR/ABL testing.