<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" article-type="abstract"><?properties open_access?><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">Open Forum Infect Dis</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="iso-abbrev">Open Forum Infect Dis</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">ofid</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Forum Infectious Diseases</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2328-8957</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Oxford University Press</publisher-name><publisher-loc>US</publisher-loc></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="pmc">6252836</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/ofid/ofy209.144</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">ofy209.144</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Abstracts</subject><subj-group subj-group-type="category-toc-heading"><subject>A. Oral Abstracts</subject></subj-group></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>1759. High Proportion of Discordant Results in Culture-Independent Diagnostic Tests (CIDT) for Shiga Toxin, Foodborne Disease Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet), 2012&#x02212;2017</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Barrett</surname><given-names>Kelly A</given-names></name><degrees>MPH</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0001">1</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Tack</surname><given-names>Danielle</given-names></name><degrees>DVM, MPVM, DACVPM</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0002">2</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Medus</surname><given-names>Carlota</given-names></name><degrees>PhD, MPH</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0003">3</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Garman</surname><given-names>Katie N</given-names></name><degrees>MPH, CHES</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0004">4</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Dunn</surname><given-names>John</given-names></name><degrees>DVM, PhD</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0005">5</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Hurd</surname><given-names>Sharon</given-names></name><degrees>MPH</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0006">6</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Hatch</surname><given-names>Julie</given-names></name><degrees>MT</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0007">7</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Parada</surname><given-names>Karleys</given-names></name><degrees>MPH</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0008">8</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Wilson</surname><given-names>Siri</given-names></name><degrees>MPH</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0009">9</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Wilson</surname><given-names>Elisha</given-names></name><degrees>MPH</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0010">10</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Wymore</surname><given-names>Kathryn</given-names></name><degrees>MPH</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0011">11</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Griffin</surname><given-names>Patricia M</given-names></name><degrees>MD, FIDSA</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0012">12</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Geissler</surname><given-names>Aimee L</given-names></name><degrees>PhD, MPH</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AF0013">13</xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="AF0001"><label>1</label>National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia</aff><aff id="AF0002"><label>2</label>Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia</aff><aff id="AF0003"><label>3</label>Minnesota Dept Health, St. Paul, Minnesota</aff><aff id="AF0004"><label>4</label>Tennessee Department of Health, Nashville, Tennessee</aff><aff id="AF0005"><label>5</label>Division of Communicable and Environmental Diseases and Emergency Preparedness, Tennessee Department of Health, Nashville, Tennessee</aff><aff id="AF0006"><label>6</label>CT EIP, New Haven, CT</aff><aff id="AF0007"><label>7</label>OR Dept of Human Services, Portland, Oregon</aff><aff id="AF0008"><label>8</label>Georgia Emerging Infections Program, Atlanta, Georgia</aff><aff id="AF0009"><label>9</label>Georgia Department of Public Health, Atlanta, Georgia</aff><aff id="AF0010"><label>10</label>Colorado Department of Public Health and Environmental, Denver, Colorado</aff><aff id="AF0011"><label>11</label>California Emerging Infections Program, Oakland, California</aff><aff id="AF0012"><label>12</label>Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, Georgia</aff><aff id="AF0013"><label>13</label>National Center for Emerging Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia</aff><pub-date pub-type="collection"><month>11</month><year>2018</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub" iso-8601-date="2018-11-26"><day>26</day><month>11</month><year>2018</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="pmc-release"><day>26</day><month>11</month><year>2018</year></pub-date><!-- PMC Release delay is 0 months and 0 days and was based on the <pub-date pub-type="epub"/>. --><volume>5</volume><issue>Suppl 1</issue><issue-title>ID Week 2018 Abstracts</issue-title><fpage>S61</fpage><lpage>S61</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>&#x000a9; The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2018</copyright-year><license license-type="cc-by-nc-nd" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/"><license-p>This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/</ext-link>), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="ofy209.144.pdf"/><abstract><title>Abstract</title><sec id="s1"><title>Background</title><p>FoodNet conducts active laboratory-based surveillance for 9 pathogens transmitted commonly through food, including Shiga toxin-producing <italic>E. coli</italic> (STEC). Adoption of CIDTs has allowed for rapid identification of Shiga toxin or Shiga toxin genes, but incorporating multiple test results with differing sensitivity and specificity complicates treatment decisions and public health surveillance. Between 2007 and 2017, FoodNet reported increases in the use of CIDTs and decreases in rates of confirmation by culture.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>Methods</title><p>We examined STEC cases reported to FoodNet during 2012&#x02212;2017 with a positive immunoassay (IA) or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test performed at a clinical laboratory, followed by positive or negative test at a state public health laboratory. Three test type combinations were assessed (IA/IA, PCR/PCR, and IA/PCR) by state, symptoms, test discordance, and culture (cx) result.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>Results</title><p>During 2012<bold>&#x02212;</bold>2017, 8,298 (76% of all STEC reported) specimens were tested by IA or PCR at both a clinical and a public health laboratory, 58% by IA/PCR, 27% by IA/IA, and 25% by PCR/PCR; some specimens had more than one test at each laboratory. Among these, 8,132 (98%) were also tested by cx. Among the IA/PCR test results, 20% were discordant and 75% of these were cx-negative. Even more of IA/IA (27%) and PCR/PCR (24%) results were discordant, and 75% of these were cx-negative. A median of 24% of test results were discordant (range by state, 13%&#x02013;44%). Persons with discordant test results were less likely to have diarrhea (91% vs. 97%) and bloody diarrhea (33% vs. 57%). During 2012&#x02013;2017, discordant results increased for IA/PCR (14% to 22%), IA/IA (17% to 34%), and PCR/PCR (6% to 25%). Most (85%) specimens with discordant results were cx-negative and 8% did not have a cx.</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>Conclusion</title><p>Almost a quarter of results were discordant, with marked variation by state, and most of these infections could not be confirmed by culture at the public health laboratory. Discordant results can pose problems for patient management. Including or excluding patients with discordant results also affects our ability to measure trends. Sensitivity and specificity of test types, test targets, and specimen transport must be considered when interpreting test results.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>Disclosures</title><p>
<bold>All authors:</bold> No reported disclosures.</p></sec></abstract><counts><page-count count="1"/></counts></article-meta></front><back><notes id="n1"><p>
<bold>Session:</bold> 211. Diagnostics Making a Difference</p><p>
<italic>Saturday, October 6, 2018: 10:30 AM</italic>
</p></notes></back></article>