Journal Article > LetterFull Text
Nature. 2015 June 17; Volume 524 (Issue 7563); 97-101.; DOI:10.1038/nature14594
Carroll MW, Matthews DA, Hiscox JA, Elmore MJ, Pollakis G, et al.
Nature. 2015 June 17; Volume 524 (Issue 7563); 97-101.; DOI:10.1038/nature14594
West Africa is currently witnessing the most extensive Ebola virus (EBOV) outbreak so far recorded. Until now, there have been 27,013 reported cases and 11,134 deaths. The origin of the virus is thought to have been a zoonotic transmission from a bat to a twoyear-old boy in December 2013 (ref. 2). From this index case the virus was spread by human-to-human contact throughout Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia. However, the origin of the particular virus in each country and time of transmission is not known and currently relies on epidemiological analysis, which may be unreliable owing to the difficulties of obtaining patient information. Here we trace the genetic evolution of EBOV in the current outbreak that has resulted in multiple lineages. Deep sequencing of 179 patient samples processed by the European Mobile Laboratory, the first diagnostics unit to be deployed to the epicentre of the outbreak in Guinea, reveals an epidemiological and evolutionary history of the epidemic from March 2014 to January 2015. Analysis of EBOV genome evolution has also benefited from a similar sequencing effort of patient samples from Sierra Leone. Our results confirm that the EBOV from Guinea moved into Sierra Leone, most likely in April or early May. The viruses of the Guinea/Sierra Leone lineage mixed around June/July 2014. Viral sequences covering August, September and October 2014 indicate that this lineage evolved independently within Guinea. These data can be used in conjunction with epidemiological information to test retrospectively the effectiveness of control measures, and provides an unprecedented window into the evolution of an ongoing viral haemorrhagic fever outbreak.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Trop Med Int Health. 2015 January 7; Volume 20 (Issue 4); DOI:10.1111/tmi.12454
Dallatomasinas S, Crestani R, Squire JS, Declerck H, Caleo GNC, et al.
Trop Med Int Health. 2015 January 7; Volume 20 (Issue 4); DOI:10.1111/tmi.12454
To describe Ebola cases in the district Ebola Management Centre of in Kailahun, a remote rural district of Sierra Leone, in terms of geographic origin, patient and hospitalization characteristics, treatment outcomes and time from symptom onset to admission.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Clin Infect Dis. 2016 August 15; Volume 63 (Issue 8); 1026-1033.; DOI:10.1093/cid/ciw452
Rosenke K, Adjemian J, Munster VJ, Marzi A, Falzarano D, et al.
Clin Infect Dis. 2016 August 15; Volume 63 (Issue 8); 1026-1033.; DOI:10.1093/cid/ciw452
BACKGROUND
The ongoing Ebola outbreak in West Africa has resulted in 28 646 suspected, probable, and confirmed Ebola virus infections. Nevertheless, malaria remains a large public health burden in the region affected by the outbreak. A joint Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/National Institutes of Health diagnostic laboratory was established in Monrovia, Liberia, in August 2014, to provide laboratory diagnostics for Ebola virus.
METHODS
All blood samples from suspected Ebola virus-infected patients admitted to the Médecins Sans Frontières ELWA3 Ebola treatment unit in Monrovia were tested by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction for the presence of Ebola virus and Plasmodium species RNA. Clinical outcome in laboratory-confirmed Ebola virus-infected patients was analyzed as a function of age, sex, Ebola viremia, and Plasmodium species parasitemia.
RESULTS
The case fatality rate of 1182 patients with laboratory-confirmed Ebola virus infections was 52%. The probability of surviving decreased with increasing age and decreased with increasing Ebola viral load. Ebola virus-infected patients were 20% more likely to survive when Plasmodium species parasitemia was detected, even after controlling for Ebola viral load and age; those with the highest levels of parasitemia had a survival rate of 83%. This effect was independent of treatment with antimalarials, as this was provided to all patients. Moreover, treatment with antimalarials did not affect survival in the Ebola virus mouse model.
CONCLUSIONS
Plasmodium species parasitemia is associated with an increase in the probability of surviving Ebola virus infection. More research is needed to understand the molecular mechanism underlying this remarkable phenomenon and translate it into treatment options for Ebola virus infection.
The ongoing Ebola outbreak in West Africa has resulted in 28 646 suspected, probable, and confirmed Ebola virus infections. Nevertheless, malaria remains a large public health burden in the region affected by the outbreak. A joint Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/National Institutes of Health diagnostic laboratory was established in Monrovia, Liberia, in August 2014, to provide laboratory diagnostics for Ebola virus.
METHODS
All blood samples from suspected Ebola virus-infected patients admitted to the Médecins Sans Frontières ELWA3 Ebola treatment unit in Monrovia were tested by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction for the presence of Ebola virus and Plasmodium species RNA. Clinical outcome in laboratory-confirmed Ebola virus-infected patients was analyzed as a function of age, sex, Ebola viremia, and Plasmodium species parasitemia.
RESULTS
The case fatality rate of 1182 patients with laboratory-confirmed Ebola virus infections was 52%. The probability of surviving decreased with increasing age and decreased with increasing Ebola viral load. Ebola virus-infected patients were 20% more likely to survive when Plasmodium species parasitemia was detected, even after controlling for Ebola viral load and age; those with the highest levels of parasitemia had a survival rate of 83%. This effect was independent of treatment with antimalarials, as this was provided to all patients. Moreover, treatment with antimalarials did not affect survival in the Ebola virus mouse model.
CONCLUSIONS
Plasmodium species parasitemia is associated with an increase in the probability of surviving Ebola virus infection. More research is needed to understand the molecular mechanism underlying this remarkable phenomenon and translate it into treatment options for Ebola virus infection.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
J Infect Dis. 2016 July 28; Volume 214 (Issue suppl 3); S303-S307.; DOI:10.1093/infdis/jiw187
de Wit E, Kramer S, Prescott JB, Rosenke K, Falzarano D, et al.
J Infect Dis. 2016 July 28; Volume 214 (Issue suppl 3); S303-S307.; DOI:10.1093/infdis/jiw187
The development of point-of-care clinical chemistry analyzers has enabled the implementation of these ancillary tests in field laboratories in resource-limited outbreak areas. The Eternal Love Winning Africa (ELWA) outbreak diagnostic laboratory, established in Monrovia, Liberia, to provide Ebola virus and Plasmodium spp. diagnostics during the Ebola epidemic, implemented clinical chemistry analyzers in December 2014. Clinical chemistry testing was performed for 68 patients in triage, including 12 patients infected with Ebola virus and 18 infected with Plasmodium spp. The main distinguishing feature in clinical chemistry of Ebola virus-infected patients was the elevation in alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, and γ-glutamyltransferase levels and the decrease in calcium. The implementation of clinical chemistry is probably most helpful when the medical supportive care implemented at the Ebola treatment unit allows for correction of biochemistry derangements and on-site clinical chemistry analyzers can be used to monitor electrolyte balance.
Journal Article > CommentaryFull Text
N Engl J Med. 2015 October 14 (Issue 15)
Sprecher A
N Engl J Med. 2015 October 14 (Issue 15)
Journal Article > CommentaryAbstract
Nat Microbiol. 2019 March 29 (Issue 5)
De Clerck H, Nanclares C, Sprecher A, Van Herp M, Wolz A
Nat Microbiol. 2019 March 29 (Issue 5)
The recent large outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) in Western Africa resulted in greatly increased accumulation of human genotypic, phenotypic and clinical data, and improved our understanding of the spectrum of clinical manifestations. As a result, the WHO disease classification of EVD underwent major revision.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
J Infect Dis. 2016 June 30; Volume 214 (Issue suppl 3); S145-S152.; DOI:10.1093/infdis/jiw198
Poliquin PG, Vogt F, Kasztura M, Leung A, Deschambault Y, et al.
J Infect Dis. 2016 June 30; Volume 214 (Issue suppl 3); S145-S152.; DOI:10.1093/infdis/jiw198
BACKGROUND
Ebola viruses (EBOVs) are primarily transmitted by contact with infected body fluids. Ebola treatment centers (ETCs) contain areas that are exposed to body fluids through the care of patients suspected or confirmed to have EBOV disease. There are limited data documenting which areas/fomites within ETCs pose a risk for potential transmission. This study conducted environmental surveillance in 2 ETCs in Freetown, Sierra Leone, during the 2014–2016 West African Ebola outbreak.
METHODS
ETCs were surveyed over a 3-week period. Sites to be swabbed were identified with input from field personnel. Swab samples were collected and tested for the presence of EBOV RNA. Ebola-positive body fluid-impregnated cotton pads were serially sampled.
RESULTS
General areas of both ETCs were negative for EBOV RNA. The immediate vicinity of patients was the area most likely to be positive for EBOV RNA. Personal protective equipment became positive during patient care, but chlorine solution washes rendered them negative.
CONCLUSIONS
Personal protective equipment and patient environs do become positive for EBOV RNA, but careful attention to decontamination seems to remove it. EBOV RNA was not detected in general ward spaces. Careful attention to decontamination protocols seems to be important in minimizing the presence of EBOV RNA within ETC wards.
Ebola viruses (EBOVs) are primarily transmitted by contact with infected body fluids. Ebola treatment centers (ETCs) contain areas that are exposed to body fluids through the care of patients suspected or confirmed to have EBOV disease. There are limited data documenting which areas/fomites within ETCs pose a risk for potential transmission. This study conducted environmental surveillance in 2 ETCs in Freetown, Sierra Leone, during the 2014–2016 West African Ebola outbreak.
METHODS
ETCs were surveyed over a 3-week period. Sites to be swabbed were identified with input from field personnel. Swab samples were collected and tested for the presence of EBOV RNA. Ebola-positive body fluid-impregnated cotton pads were serially sampled.
RESULTS
General areas of both ETCs were negative for EBOV RNA. The immediate vicinity of patients was the area most likely to be positive for EBOV RNA. Personal protective equipment became positive during patient care, but chlorine solution washes rendered them negative.
CONCLUSIONS
Personal protective equipment and patient environs do become positive for EBOV RNA, but careful attention to decontamination seems to remove it. EBOV RNA was not detected in general ward spaces. Careful attention to decontamination protocols seems to be important in minimizing the presence of EBOV RNA within ETC wards.
Journal Article > Short ReportFull Text
F1000Research. 2024 August 28; Volume 13 (Issue 642); DOI:10.12688/f1000research.150755.2
Lampaert E, Nsio JM, Nair D, Mashako M, De Weggheleire A, et al.
F1000Research. 2024 August 28; Volume 13 (Issue 642); DOI:10.12688/f1000research.150755.2
BACKGROUND
Traditionally in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), centralised Ebola treatment centres (ETCs) have been set exclusively for Ebola virus disease (EVD) case management during outbreaks. During the 2020 EVD outbreak in DRC’s Equateur Province, existing health centres were equipped as decentralised treatment centres (DTC) to improve access for patients with suspected EVD. Between ETCs and DTCs, we compared the time from symptom onset to admission and diagnosis among patients with suspected EVD.
METHODS
This was a cohort study based on analysis of a line-list containing demographic and clinical information of patients with suspected EVD admitted to any EVD health facility during the outbreak.
RESULTS
Of 2359 patients with suspected EVD, 363 (15%) were first admitted to a DTC. Of 1996 EVD-suspected patients initially admitted to an ETC, 72 (4%) were confirmed as EVD-positive. Of 363 EVD-suspected patients initially admitted to a DTC, 6 (2%) were confirmed and managed as EVD-positive in the DTC. Among all EVD-suspected patients, the median (interquartile range) duration between symptom onset and admission was 2 (1-4) days in a DTC compared to 4 (2-7) days in an ETC (p<0.001). Similarly, time from symptom onset to admission was significantly shorter among EVD-suspected patients ultimately diagnosed as EVD-negative.
CONCLUSIONS
Since <5% of the EVD-suspected patients admitted were eventually diagnosed with EVD, there is a need for better screening to optimise resource utilization and outbreak control. Only one in seven EVD-suspected patients were admitted to a DTC first, as the DTCs were piloted in a limited and phased manner. However, there is a case to be made for considering decentralized care especially in remote and hard-to-reach areas in places like the DRC to facilitate early access to care, contain viral shedding by patients with EVD and ensure no disrupted provision of non-EVD services.
Journal Article > ReviewFull Text
Lancet Infect Dis. 2016 June 10; Volume 16 (Issue 7); DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30063-9
Cnops L, van Griensven J, Honko AN, Bausch DG, Sprecher A, et al.
Lancet Infect Dis. 2016 June 10; Volume 16 (Issue 7); DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30063-9
Quantitative measurement of viral load is an important parameter in the management of filovirus disease outbreaks because viral load correlates with severity of disease, survival, and infectivity. During the ongoing Ebola virus disease outbreak in parts of Western Africa, most assays used in the detection of Ebola virus disease by more than 44 diagnostic laboratories yielded qualitative results. Regulatory hurdles involved in validating quantitative assays and the urgent need for a rapid Ebola virus disease diagnosis precluded development of validated quantitative assays during the outbreak. Because of sparse quantitative data obtained from these outbreaks, opportunities for study of correlations between patient outcome, changes in viral load during the course of an outbreak, disease course in asymptomatic individuals, and the potential for virus transmission between infected patients and contacts have been limited. We strongly urge the continued development of quantitative viral load assays to carefully evaluate these parameters in future outbreaks of filovirus disease.
Journal Article > CommentaryFull Text
Lancet Infect Dis. 2016 September 19; Volume 16 (Issue 10); DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30339-5
Cnops L, van Griensven J, Honko AN, Bausch DG, Sprecher A, et al.
Lancet Infect Dis. 2016 September 19; Volume 16 (Issue 10); DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30339-5