Premium
Hepatitis B virus DNA–positive, hepatitis B surface antigen–negative blood donations intercepted by anti‐hepatitis B core antigen testing: the Canadian Blood Services experience
Author(s) -
O'Brien Sheila F.,
Fearon Margaret A.,
Yi QiLong,
Fan Wenli,
Scalia Vito,
Muntz Irene R.,
Vamvakas Eleftherios C.
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
transfusion
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.045
H-Index - 132
eISSN - 1537-2995
pISSN - 0041-1132
DOI - 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2007.01396.x
Subject(s) - hbsag , medicine , hepatitis b virus , virology , infectivity , hepatitis b , orthohepadnavirus , antigen , immunology , hepadnaviridae , antibody , hepatitis , virus
BACKGROUND: The benefit of introducing anti‐hepatitis B core antigen (HBc) screening for intercepting potentially infectious donations missed by hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) screening in Canada was studied. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Anti‐HBc testing of all donations was implemented in April 2005, along with antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen (anti‐HBs) and hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA supplemental testing of anti‐HBc repeat‐reactive, HBsAg‐negative donations. The proportion of potentially infectious donations intercepted by anti‐HBc over the initial 18 months of testing was calculated based on three assumptions relating infectivity of HBV DNA–positive units to anti‐HBs levels. Lookback was conducted for all DNA‐positive donations. RESULTS: Of 493,344 donors, 5,585 (1.13%) were repeat‐reactive for the presence of anti‐HBc, with 29 (0.52%) being HBV DNA–positive and HBsAg‐negative. The proportion of potentially infectious donations intercepted by anti‐HBc screening was 1 in 17,800 if all HBV DNA–positive donations were infectious, 1 in 26,900 if infectivity was limited to donations with an anti‐HBs level of not more than 100 mIU per mL, and 1 in 69,300 if only donations with undetectable anti‐HBs were infectious. For 279 components in the lookback study, no traced recipients were HBsAg‐positive and 7 recipients were anti‐HBc–reactive in association with 4 donors, 3 of whom had an anti‐HBs level of more than 100 mIU per mL and 1 of whom had a level of 61 mIU per mL. CONCLUSION: Implementation of anti‐HBc screening reduced the risk of transfusing potentially infectious units by at least as much as had been expected based on the literature. The lookback did not provide proof of transfusion transmission of HBV from HBV DNA–positive, anti‐HBc–reactive, HBsAg‐negative donors but it did not establish lack of transmission either.