No abstract

Early detection of SARS-CoV in throat wash and saliva suggests that these specimens are ideal for SARS diagnosis.

Thirty-one cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) occurred after exposure in the emergency room at the National Taiwan University Hospital. The index patient was linked to an outbreak at a nearby municipal hospital. Three clusters were identified over a 3-week period. The first cluster (5 patients) and the second cluster (14 patients) occurred among patients, family members, and nursing aids. The third cluster (12 patients) occurred exclusively among healthcare workers. Six healthcare workers had close contact with SARS patients. Six others, with different working patterns, indicated that they did not have contact with a SARS patient. Environmental surveys found 9 of 119 samples of inanimate objects to be positive for SARS coronavirus RNA. These observations indicate that although transmission by direct contact with known SARS patients was responsible for most cases, environmental contamination with the SARS coronavirus may have lead to infection among healthcare workers without documented contact with known hospitalized SARS patients.

Background: The 2-drug regimen dolutegravir + lamivudine was noninferior to dolutegravir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine in achieving HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL in treatment-naive adults in the 48-week primary analysis of the GEMINI trials. We present results from the prespecified 96-week secondary analyses. Setting: One hundred eighty-seven centers in 21 countries. Methods: GEMINI-1 and GEMINI-2 are identical, double-blind phase III studies. Participants with screening HIV-1 RNA ≤500,000 copies/mL were randomized 1:1 to once-daily dolutegravir + lamivudine or dolutegravir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine. Results: At week 96, dolutegravir + lamivudine (N = 716) was noninferior to dolutegravir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (N = 717) in achieving HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL (Snapshot algorithm; −10% noninferiority margin) in the pooled analysis (proportion of responders, 86.0% vs 89.5%, respectively; adjusted treatment difference [95% CI], −3.4% [−6.7 to 0.0007]), GEMINI-1 (−4.9% [−9.8 to 0.03]), and GEMINI-2 (−1.8% [−6.4 to 2.7]). Proportions of participants in the HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/mL Snapshot category were largely unchanged from week 48 to 96. Eleven participants taking dolutegravir + lamivudine and 7 taking dolutegravir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine met confirmed virologic withdrawal criteria through week 96; none had treatment-emergent resistance mutations. Dolutegravir + lamivudine had a lower rate of drug-related adverse events than dolutegravir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (19.6% vs 25.0%; relative risk ratio, 0.78; 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.95). Renal and bone biomarker changes favored dolutegravir + lamivudine. Conclusions: Consistent with 48-week data, dolutegravir + lamivudine demonstrated long-term, noninferior efficacy vs dolutegravir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine without increased risk of treatment-emergent resistance, supporting its use in treatment-naive HIV-1–infected individuals.