Environmental Stability and Infectivity of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) in Different Human Body Fluids

Contemporary Insights into Hepatitis C Virus: A Comprehensive Review

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) remains a significant global health challenge. Approximately 50 million people were living with chronic hepatitis C based on the World Health Organization as of 2024, contributing extensively to global morbidity and mortality. The advent and approval of several direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimens significantly improved HCV treatment, offering potentially high rates of cure for chronic hepatitis C. However, the promising aim of eventual HCV eradication remains challenging. Key challenges include the variability in DAA access across different regions, slightly variable response rates to DAAs across diverse patient populations and HCV genotypes/subtypes, and the emergence of resistance-associated substitutions (RASs), potentially conferring resistance to DAAs. Therefore, periodic reassessment of current HCV knowledge is needed. An up-to-date review on HCV is also necessitated based on the observed shifts in HCV epidemiological trends, continuous development and approval of therapeutic strategies, and changes in public health policies. Thus, the current comprehensive review aimed to integrate the latest knowledge on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnostic approaches, treatment options and preventive strategies for HCV, with a particular focus on the current challenges associated with RASs and ongoing efforts in vaccine development. This review sought to provide healthcare professionals, researchers, and policymakers with the necessary insights to address the HCV burden more effectively. We aimed to highlight the progress made in managing and preventing HCV infection and to highlight the persistent barriers challenging the prevention of HCV infection. The overarching goal was to align with global health objectives towards reducing the burden of chronic hepatitis, aiming for its eventual elimination as a public health threat by 2030.

Multicenter performance evaluation of the Elecsys HCV Duo immunoassay

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic accuracy of the Elecsys® HCV Duo antigen-antibody combination immunoassay (Roche Diagnostics GmbH) was evaluated for the detection of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, versus commercially available comparators.

METHODS

This multicenter study (August 2020-March 2021) assessed the specificity of the Elecsys HCV Duo immunoassay and comparator assays in blood donor and routine clinical laboratory samples; sensitivity was determined in confirmed HCV-positive samples and seroconversion panels. The Elecsys HCV Duo immunoassay was compared with the Monolisa HCV Ag-Ab ULTRA V2, Murex HCV Ag/Ab Combination and ARCHITECT HCV Ag assays, as well as nucleic acid testing (NAT). The antibody (anti-HCV) module of the Elecsys HCV Duo immunoassay was compared with the Elecsys Anti-HCV II, Alinity s Anti-HCV, ARCHITECT Anti-HCV and RIBA HCV 3.0 SIA assays.

RESULTS

The specificity of the Elecsys HCV Duo immunoassay was 99.94% (95% confidence interval [CI], 99.89-99.97) and 99.92% (95% CI, 99.71-99.99) in blood donor (n = 20,634) and routine clinical laboratory samples (n = 2531), respectively. The specificity of the Elecsys HCV Duo immunoassay was similar or better than comparator assays. The sensitivity of the Elecsys HCV Duo immunoassay in confirmed HCV-positive samples (n = 257) was 99.6%. In seroconversion panels, the Elecsys HCV Duo immunoassay detected infections earlier (2.2-21.9 days) than all but one of the comparator assays and detected HCV 1.8 days later than NAT.

CONCLUSIONS

The Elecsys HCV Duo immunoassay shows high diagnostic accuracy, reduces the diagnostic window, and could be used when NAT is not possible.

Modeling hepatitis C virus kinetics during liver transplantation reveals the role of the liver in virus clearance

While the liver, specifically hepatocytes, are widely accepted as the main source of hepatitis C virus (HCV) production, the role of the liver/hepatocytes in clearance of circulating HCV remains unknown. Frequent HCV kinetic data were recorded and mathematically modeled from five liver transplant patients throughout the anhepatic (absence of liver) phase and for 4 hr post-reperfusion. During the anhepatic phase, HCV remained at pre-anhepatic levels (n = 3) or declined (n = 2) with t_1/2~1 hr. Immediately post-reperfusion, virus declined in a biphasic manner in four patients consisting of a rapid decline (t_1/2 = 5 min) followed by a slower decline (t_1/2 = 67 min). Consistent with the majority of patients in the anhepatic phase, when we monitored HCV clearance at 37°C from culture medium in the absence/presence of chronically infected hepatoma cells that were inhibited from secreting HCV, the HCV t_1/2 in cell culture was longer in the absence of chronically HCV-infected cells. The results suggest that the liver plays a major role in the clearance of circulating HCV and that hepatocytes may be involved.

Heat-Treated Virus Inactivation Rate Depends Strongly on Treatment Procedure: Illustration with SARS-CoV-2

Decontamination helps limit environmental transmission of infectious agents. It is required for the safe reuse of contaminated medical, laboratory, and personal protective equipment, and for the safe handling of biological samples. Heat treatment is a common decontamination method, notably used for viruses. We show that for liquid specimens (here, solution of SARS-CoV-2 in cell culture medium), the virus inactivation rate under heat treatment at 70°C can vary by almost two orders of magnitude depending on the treatment procedure, from a half-life of 0.86 min (95% credible interval [CI] 0.09, 1.77) in closed vials in a heat block to 37.04 min (95% CI 12.64, 869.82) in uncovered plates in a dry oven. These findings suggest a critical role of evaporation in virus inactivation via dry heat. Placing samples in open or uncovered containers may dramatically reduce the speed and efficacy of heat treatment for virus inactivation. Given these findings, we reviewed the literature on temperature-dependent coronavirus stability and found that specimen container types, along with whether they are closed, covered, or uncovered, are rarely reported in the scientific literature. Heat-treatment procedures must be fully specified when reporting experimental studies to facilitate result interpretation and reproducibility, and must be carefully considered when developing decontamination guidelines. IMPORTANCE Heat is a powerful weapon against most infectious agents. It is widely used for decontamination of medical, laboratory, and personal protective equipment, and for biological samples. There are many methods of heat treatment, and methodological details can affect speed and efficacy of decontamination. We applied four different heat-treatment procedures to liquid specimens containing SARS-CoV-2. Our results show that the container used to store specimens during decontamination can substantially affect inactivation rate; for a given initial level of contamination, decontamination time can vary from a few minutes in closed vials to several hours in uncovered plates. Reviewing the literature, we found that container choices and heat treatment methods are only rarely reported explicitly in methods sections. Our study shows that careful consideration of heat-treatment procedure-in particular the choice of specimen container and whether it is covered-can make results more consistent across studies, improve decontamination practice, and provide insight into the mechanisms of virus inactivation.

Heat-treated virus inactivation rate depends strongly on treatment procedure: illustration with SARS-CoV-2

Decontamination helps limit environmental transmission of infectious agents. It is required for the safe re-use of contaminated medical, laboratory and personal protective equipment, and for the safe handling of biological samples. Heat treatment is a common decontamination method, notably used for viruses. We show that for liquid specimens (here, solution of SARS-CoV-2 in cell culture medium), virus inactivation rate under heat treatment at 70°C can vary by almost two orders of magnitude depending on the treatment procedure, from a half-life of 0.86 min (95% credible interval: [0.09, 1.77]) in closed vials in a heat block to 37.00 min ([12.65, 869.82]) in uncovered plates in a dry oven. These findings suggest a critical role of evaporation in virus inactivation via dry heat. Placing samples in open or uncovered containers may dramatically reduce the speed and efficacy of heat treatment for virus inactivation. Given these findings, we reviewed the literature temperature-dependent coronavirus stability and found that specimen containers, and whether they are closed, covered, or uncovered, are rarely reported in the scientific literature. Heat-treatment procedures must be fully specified when reporting experimental studies to facilitate result interpretation and reproducibility, and must be carefully considered when developing decontamination guidelines.

Effect of Intraocular Pressure on Aerosol Density Generated by Noncontact Tonometer Measurement

PRECIS

Aerosols generated by a noncontact tonometer (NCT) were quantified. There was a positive correlation between aerosols and intraocular pressure (IOP), and the concentration of aerosols beside the air jet port was the highest.

PURPOSE

To investigate the effects of IOP on the aerosol density generated during the use of an NCT and provide references and suggestions for daily protection of ophthalmic medical staff during the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) outbreak.

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS

This cross-sectional clinical trial included 214 eyes of 140 patients from a hospital in Wenzhou city, Zhejiang Province. All subjects' IOPs were measured by an NCT (39 eyes with low IOP, 90 eyes with normal IOP, 37 eyes with moderately high IOP, and 48 eyes with very high IOP) between March 7 and June 17, 2020. The density of particulate matter (PM) 2.5 and PM10 generated during the process of IOP measurement with an NCT was analyzed. IOP values were recorded simultaneously. The aerosols generated during different IOP measurements were plotted in scatter plots.

RESULTS

PM2.5 was generated more at the air jet port of the tonometer during the process of IOP measurement (H=2.731, P=0.019). Larger quantities of PM2.5 and PM10 were generated when the IOP was higher, and these differences were statistically significant (PM2.5: H=119.476, P<0.001; PM10: H=160.801, P<0.001). Linear correlation analysis with one variable demonstrated that IOP had significantly positive correlations with PM2.5 (r=0.756, P<0.001) and PM10 (r=0.864, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Aerosols can be generated while using an NCT to measure IOP, and aerosols and IOP are positively correlated. Patients with moderately high IOP or very high IOP tend to generate more aerosols during the IOP measurement. The concentration of aerosols beside the air jet port was the highest.