Prevalence of cytomegalovirus DNAemia and genotypic distribution among childbearing mothers and neonates in Taiwan

Human cytomegalovirus infection and its association with gestational diabetes mellitus during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Infection is an important risk factor for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), while infection of human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) with GDM remains unclear and rarely reported. This study aimed to investigate the association of HCMV infection and serum inflammatory factor levels in pregnancy with GDM.

METHODS

This prospective study included pregnant women who attended at Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao Hospital and Zibo Maternal and Child Health Hospital between December 2018 and August 2020. HCMV specific IgM and serum levels of inflammatory factors, including TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β, were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 5,316 pregnant women were included (415 with GDM (107 with HCMV+GDM+ and 308 with HCMV-GDM+) and 4901 GDM-free (759 with HCMV+GDM- and 4142 with HCMV-GDM-)). The prevalence of GDM was 7.81%. The rate of activation of HCMV was 16.29%. Specifically, 107 and 759 women in the GDM and control group exhibited HCMV infection, with positive rates of25.78% and 15.48%, respectively (P < 0.01). TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β at 24-28 weeks of gestation were significantly higher in women with GDM and HCMV infection than inthe other groups (all P < 0.01). Multivariable analysis showed that HCMV positive (OR = 1.851; 95% CI [1.425-2.403]; P < 0.001), IL-6 (OR = 1.010; 95% CI [1.002-1.018]; P = 0.013), and IL-1β (OR = 1.410; 95% CI [1.348-1.474]; P < 0.001) were all significantly correlated with GDM.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests HCMV infection during pregnancy is an independent risk factor of GDM and could significantly increase its incidence. Further studies are needed to elucidate possible mechanisms underlying associations between HCMV infection and GDM.

Multicenter evaluation of two chemiluminescence and three lateral flow immunoassays for the diagnosis of COVID-19 and assessment of antibody dynamic responses to SARS-CoV-2 in Taiwan

This multicenter, retrospective study included 346 serum samples from 74 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and 194 serum samples from non-COVID-19 patients to evaluate the performance of five anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody tests, i.e. two chemiluminescence immunoassays (CLIAs): Roche Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Test (Roche Test) and Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Abbott Test), and three lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs): Wondfo SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test (Wondfo Test), ASK COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test (ASK Test), and Dynamiker 2019-nCoV IgG/IgM Rapid Test (Dynamiker Test). We found high diagnostic sensitivities (%, 95% confidence interval [CI]) for the Roche Test (97.4%, 93.4–99.0%), Abbott Test (94.0%, 89.1–96.8%), Wondfo Test (91.4%, 85.8–94.9%), ASK Test (97.4%, 93.4–99.0%), and Dynamiker Test (90.1%, 84.3–94.0%) after >21 days of symptom onset. Meanwhile, the diagnostic specificity was 99.0% (95% CI, 96.3–99.7%) for the Roche Test, 97.9% (95% CI, 94.8–99.2%) for the Abbott Test, and 100.0% (95% CI, 98.1–100.0%) for the three LFIAs. Cross-reactivity was observed in sera containing anti-cytomegalovirus (CMV) IgG/IgM antibodies and autoantibodies. No difference was observed in the time to seroconversion detection of the five serological tests. Specimens from patients with COVID-19 pneumonia demonstrated a shorter seroconversion time and higher chemiluminescent signal than those without pneumonia. Our data suggested that understanding the dynamic antibody response after COVID-19 infection and performance characteristics of different serological test are crucial for the appropriate interpretation of serological test result for the diagnosis and risk assessment of patient with COVID-19 infection.