Optimal selection of screening assays for infectious agents in donated blood

Optimal portfolios of blood safety interventions: test, defer or modify?

A safe supply of blood for transfusion is a critical component of the healthcare system in all countries. Most health systems manage the risk of transfusion-transmissible infections (TTIs) through a portfolio of blood safety interventions. These portfolios must be updated periodically to reflect shifting epidemiological conditions, emerging infectious diseases, and new technologies. However, the number of available blood safety portfolios grows exponentially with the number of available interventions, making it impossible for policymakers to evaluate all feasible portfolios without the assistance of a computer model. We develop a novel optimization model for evaluating blood safety portfolios that enables systematic comparison of all feasible portfolios of deferral, testing, and modification interventions to identify the portfolio that is preferred from a cost-utility perspective. We present structural properties that reduce the state space and required computation time in certain cases, and we develop a linear approximation of the model. We apply the model to retrospectively evaluate U.S. blood safety policies for Zika and West Nile virus for the years 2017, 2018, and 2019, defining donor groups based on season and geography. We leverage structural properties to efficiently find an optimal solution. We find that the optimal portfolio varies geographically, seasonally, and over time. Additionally, we show that for this problem the approximated model yields the same optimal solution as the exact model. Our method enables systematic identification of the optimal blood safety portfolio in any setting and any time period, thereby supporting decision makers in efforts to ensure the safety of the blood supply.

Residual risk and waste in donated blood with pooled nucleic acid testing

An accurate estimation of the residual risk of transfusion-transmittable infections (TTIs), which includes the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B and C viruses (HBV, HCV), among others, is essential, as it provides the basis for blood screening assay selection. While the highly sensitive nucleic acid testing (NAT) technology has recently become available, it is highly costly. As a result, in most countries, including the United States, the current practice for human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus screening in donated blood is to use pooled NAT. Pooling substantially reduces the number of tests required, especially for TTIs with low prevalence rates. However, pooling also reduces the test's sensitivity, because the viral load of an infected sample might be diluted by the other samples in the pool to the point that it is not detectable by NAT, leading to potential TTIs. Infection-free blood may also be falsely discarded, resulting in wasted blood. We derive expressions for the residual risk, expected number of tests, and expected amount of blood wasted for various two-stage pooled testing schemes, including Dorfman-type and array-based testing, considering infection progression, infectivity of the blood unit, and imperfect tests under the dilution effect and measurement errors. We then calibrate our model using published data and perform a case study. Our study offers key insights on how pooled NAT, used within different testing schemes, contributes to the safety and cost of blood. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A probabilistic method for the estimation of residual risk in donated blood

The residual risk (RR) of transfusion-transmitted infections, including the human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis B and C viruses, is typically estimated by the incidence[Formula: see text]window period model, which relies on the following restrictive assumptions: Each screening test, with probability 1, (1) detects an infected unit outside of the test's window period; (2) fails to detect an infected unit within the window period; and (3) correctly identifies an infection-free unit. These assumptions need not hold in practice due to random or systemic errors and individual variations in the window period. We develop a probability model that accurately estimates the RR by relaxing these assumptions, and quantify their impact using a published cost-effectiveness study and also within an optimization model. These assumptions lead to inaccurate estimates in cost-effectiveness studies and to sub-optimal solutions in the optimization model. The testing solution generated by the optimization model translates into fewer expected infections without an increase in the testing cost.