Simran Gupta, Sarah E Turbett, Erik Klontz, Camille N Kotton
{"title":"免疫功能正常和免疫功能低下患者血液中 EBV DNA 检测的临床实用性:单中心经验。","authors":"Simran Gupta, Sarah E Turbett, Erik Klontz, Camille N Kotton","doi":"10.1093/ajcp/aqae143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) causes different clinical presentations in immunocompetent and immunocompromised persons, and thus indications for testing vary between these populations. We reviewed our institution's EBV DNA testing across these populations to understand its clinical utility and appropriateness.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective chart review of adult patients with positive EBV nucleic acid amplification (NAAT) testing from November 2022 to 2023. We recorded demographics, indications for testing, EBV-related diagnosis, laboratory results, and whether testing influenced patient treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 3560 EBV NAAT tests, 187 (5.3%) were positive, representing 124 unique adult patients (51 immunocompetent and 73 immunocompromised). Reactivation of EBV was the most common diagnosis in both populations, followed by acute EBV infection in the immunocompetent and non-posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder malignancies in the immunocompromised. In immunocompromised patients, positive tests led to treatment changes more frequently than in immunocompetent patients (27.4% vs 11.7%, P = .06). Testing affected clinical management in 0% to 2% of cases when sent for sepsis/shock and nonspecific viral syndromes compared to 37% to 49% of cases when sent for posttransplant and malignancy screening/monitoring.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>EBV NAAT testing infrequently influenced clinical management in immunocompetent individuals but had a notable impact in immunocompromised patients, particularly those undergoing posttransplant or malignancy screening. This underscores the need for targeted testing to optimize resource utilization and cost-effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical utility of EBV DNA testing of blood in immunocompetent and immunocompromised patients: A single-center experience.\",\"authors\":\"Simran Gupta, Sarah E Turbett, Erik Klontz, Camille N Kotton\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ajcp/aqae143\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) causes different clinical presentations in immunocompetent and immunocompromised persons, and thus indications for testing vary between these populations. We reviewed our institution's EBV DNA testing across these populations to understand its clinical utility and appropriateness.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective chart review of adult patients with positive EBV nucleic acid amplification (NAAT) testing from November 2022 to 2023. We recorded demographics, indications for testing, EBV-related diagnosis, laboratory results, and whether testing influenced patient treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 3560 EBV NAAT tests, 187 (5.3%) were positive, representing 124 unique adult patients (51 immunocompetent and 73 immunocompromised). Reactivation of EBV was the most common diagnosis in both populations, followed by acute EBV infection in the immunocompetent and non-posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder malignancies in the immunocompromised. In immunocompromised patients, positive tests led to treatment changes more frequently than in immunocompetent patients (27.4% vs 11.7%, P = .06). Testing affected clinical management in 0% to 2% of cases when sent for sepsis/shock and nonspecific viral syndromes compared to 37% to 49% of cases when sent for posttransplant and malignancy screening/monitoring.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>EBV NAAT testing infrequently influenced clinical management in immunocompetent individuals but had a notable impact in immunocompromised patients, particularly those undergoing posttransplant or malignancy screening. This underscores the need for targeted testing to optimize resource utilization and cost-effectiveness.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqae143\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqae143","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinical utility of EBV DNA testing of blood in immunocompetent and immunocompromised patients: A single-center experience.
Objectives: Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) causes different clinical presentations in immunocompetent and immunocompromised persons, and thus indications for testing vary between these populations. We reviewed our institution's EBV DNA testing across these populations to understand its clinical utility and appropriateness.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of adult patients with positive EBV nucleic acid amplification (NAAT) testing from November 2022 to 2023. We recorded demographics, indications for testing, EBV-related diagnosis, laboratory results, and whether testing influenced patient treatment.
Results: Of 3560 EBV NAAT tests, 187 (5.3%) were positive, representing 124 unique adult patients (51 immunocompetent and 73 immunocompromised). Reactivation of EBV was the most common diagnosis in both populations, followed by acute EBV infection in the immunocompetent and non-posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder malignancies in the immunocompromised. In immunocompromised patients, positive tests led to treatment changes more frequently than in immunocompetent patients (27.4% vs 11.7%, P = .06). Testing affected clinical management in 0% to 2% of cases when sent for sepsis/shock and nonspecific viral syndromes compared to 37% to 49% of cases when sent for posttransplant and malignancy screening/monitoring.
Discussion: EBV NAAT testing infrequently influenced clinical management in immunocompetent individuals but had a notable impact in immunocompromised patients, particularly those undergoing posttransplant or malignancy screening. This underscores the need for targeted testing to optimize resource utilization and cost-effectiveness.