Study findings could lead to new biomarker targets for clinical laboratories working to identify AMR bacteria
Reducing and managing antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major goal of researchers and health systems across the globe. And it is the job of microbiologists and clinical laboratories to identify microbes that are AMR and those which are not to guide physicians as to the most appropriate therapies for patients with bacterial infections.
“AMR is a silent pandemic of much greater risk to society than COVID-19. In addition to 10 million deaths per year by 2050, the WHO estimates AMR will cost the global economy $100 trillion if we can’t find a way to combat antibiotic failure,” Timothy Barnett, PhD (above), Deputy Director and head of the Strep A Pathogenesis and Diagnostics team at Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, told News Medical. Additional research may provide new targets for clinical laboratories tasked with identifying antimicrobial resistant bacteria. (Photo copyright: University of Western Australia.)
Rendering an Antibiotic Ineffective
According to the University of Oxford, about 1.2 million people died worldwide in 2019 due to AMR, and antimicrobial-resistant infections played a role in as many as 4.95 million deaths that same year. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared AMR one of the top ten global public health threats facing humanity.
While investigating antibiotic sensitivity of Group A Streptococcus—a potentially deadly bacteria often detected on the skin and in the throat—the Australian researchers uncovered a mechanism that enabled bacteria to absorb nutrients from their human host and evade the antibiotic sulfamethoxazole, a commonly-prescribed treatment for Group A Strep.
“Bacteria need to make their own folates to grow and, in turn, cause disease. Some antibiotics work by blocking this folate production to stop bacteria growing and treat the infection,” Timothy Barnett, PhD, Deputy Director of the Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases and head of the Strep A Pathogenesis and Diagnostics team, told News Medical.
“When looking at an antibiotic commonly prescribed to treat Group A Strep skin infections, we found a mechanism of resistance where, for the first time ever, the bacteria demonstrated the ability to take folates directly from its human host when blocked from producing their own. This makes the antibiotic ineffective and the infection would likely worsen when the patient should be getting better,” he added.
According to their study, the researchers identified an energy-coupling (ECF) factor transporter S component gene that allows Group A Strep to acquire extracellular reduced folate compounds that likely “expands the substrate specificity of an endogenous ECF transporter to acquire reduced folate compounds directly from the host, thereby bypassing the inhibition of folate biosynthesis by sulfamethoxazole.”
The study indicates that this new form of antibiotic resistance is indistinguishable under traditional testing used in microbiology and clinical laboratories, which in turn makes it difficult for clinicians to prescribe effective antibiotics to fight an infection.
Understanding AMR before It Is Too Late
The research suggests that understanding AMR is more complicated and intricate than previously thought. Barnett and his team believe their discovery is just the “tip of the iceberg” and that it will prove to be a far-reaching issue across other bacterial pathogens in addition to Group A Strep.
“Without antibiotics, we face a world where there will be no way to stop deadly infections, cancer patients won’t be able to have chemotherapy and people won’t have access to have life-saving surgeries,” Barnett told News Medical. “In order to preserve the long-term efficacy of antibiotics, we need to further identify and understand new mechanisms of antibiotic resistance, which will aid in the discovery of new antibiotics and allow us to monitor AMR as it arises.”
More research and clinical studies are needed before this discovery can become technology that clinical laboratories can use to test if microbes are AMR. The scientists at Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases are now developing testing methods to detect the presence of the antibiotic resistant mechanism and determine the best treatment options.
“It is vital we stay one step ahead of the challenges of AMR and, as researchers, we should continue to explore how resistance develops in pathogens and design rapid accurate diagnostic methods and therapeutics,” Kalindu Rodrigo, a PhD student in the Barnett lab and one of the authors of the study told News Medical. “On the other hand, equal efforts should be taken at all levels of the society including patients, health professionals, and policymakers to help reduce the impacts of AMR.”
These new insights might lead to a new line of clinical laboratory testing, particularly if the results could guide the patient to microbiome-based repellents that would remain effective for months once applied
Researchers are beginning to identify what compounds make individuals more attractive to mosquitos. That is a first step in the development of a biomarker that could be developed into a clinical laboratory test. Question is: would there be enough consumers wanting to do a lab test to determine if they were highly attractive to mosquitos, thus making this a revenue-generating test for labs?
The SA article reported on their study published in the journal Cell titled, “Differential Mosquito Attraction to Humans Is Associated with Skin-Derived Carboxylic Acid Levels.” The researchers, according to SA, found that individual humans have “a unique scent profile made up of different chemical compounds” and that “mosquitoes were most drawn to people whose skin produces high levels of carboxylic acids.” The researchers also found that “attractiveness to mosquitoes remained steady over time, regardless of changes in diet or grooming habits.”
At a minimum, there would be widespread consumer interest to at least understand why some individuals get more mosquito bites than others. What may be of particular interest to microbiologists is the statement by molecular biologist Omar Akbari, PhD, of the University of California, San Diego, who told Scientific American that by “taking human-colonizing skin bacteria … and engineering them in such a way that they can either express a repellent compound or be able to degrade something that’s attractive,” a mosquito repellant could be developed that would last for months once applied.
“This study clearly shows that these acids are important,” neurogeneticist Matthew DeGennaro, PhD (above), told CNN. “… how the mosquitoes perceive these carboxylic acids is interesting because these particular chemicals … are hard to smell at a distance. It could be that these chemicals are being altered by … the skin microbiome … if we understand why mosquitoes find a host, we can design new repellents that will block the mosquitoes from sensing those chemicals, and this could be used to improve our current repellents.” Clinical laboratory testing will be needed to produce biomarkers for developing such improved repellents. (Photo copyright: Laboratory of Tropical Genetics.)
Clinical Laboratory Testing Needed to Identify Levels of Carboxylic Acids
To complete their study, the researchers had 64 participants wear nylon stockings for six hours on their arms to get their unique scent into the fabric. The scent on the stockings was not discernible to the human nose, but it was to the mosquitos.
Two pieces of the nylon were then placed in a closed container with Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. The researchers found that certain samples were more popular with the mosquitos than others. Upon further analysis the researchers found that the most popular samples came from subjects with higher levels of carboxylic acids, and the least popular had the lowest levels. The scientists ran the test with the same participants several times over three years and the results remained largely the same.
Carboxylic acid is an organic compound found in humans in sebum, the oily layer protecting our skin. The level at which humans release carboxylic acid varies from person to person. And there is no discernible way the human nose can determine whether a person has the level of carboxylic acid on the skin that mosquitos find desirable. The answer would need to be determined by a diagnostic test performed in a clinical laboratory.
Although the development of a test to determine someone’s susceptibility to mosquitos may be far away, there could be significant consumer interest in developing such a test.
“The question of why some people are more attractive to mosquitoes than others—that’s the question that everybody asks,” Leslie B. Vosshall, PhD, Chief Scientific Officer, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, who led the research team to find out why some people are more attractive to mosquitos than others, told Scientific American. “My mother, my sister, people in the street, my colleagues—everybody wants to know.” She credits their interest as the inspiration for embarking on the study.
“Understanding what makes someone a ‘mosquito magnet’ will suggest ways to rationally design interventions such as skin microbiota manipulation to make people less attractive to mosquitoes. We propose that the ability to predict which individuals in a community are high attractors would allow for more effective deployment of resources to combat the spread of mosquito-borne pathogens,” the researchers wrote in their Cell paper.
Preventing Spread of Deadly Diseases
Although mosquitos are an annoyance, they also can be dangerous vectors of disease.
“Every bite of these mosquitoes puts people into public health danger. Aedes aegypti mosquitoes are vectors for dengue, yellow fever, and Zika,” Vosshall told CNN. “Those people who are magnets are going to be much more likely to be infected with viruses.”
Further research into these early findings may help develop diagnostic tests to protect against the spread of these diseases and identify individuals who are more attractive to the mosquitos, and therefore, more likely to contract and spread disease.
Being able to identify which individuals are mosquito magnets could help keep individuals safe from dangerous diseases, and development of a better repellent could also make outdoor summer events more bearable for the (unfortunately) popular among the pests. Medical laboratory tests associated with determining an individual’s susceptibility to mosquito bites could give clinical laboratories a new way to add value to consumers and patients.
Fujifilm acquired Inspirata’s Dynamyx digital pathology technology and business while GE Healthcare announced a partnership with Tribun Health in Europe
Clinical pathology laboratories, especially in the US, have been slow to adopt digital imaging systems. But recent industry deals suggest that the market may soon heat up, at least in the eyes of vendors. These collaborators may hope that, by integrating diagnostic data, the accuracy and productivity of anatomic pathologists will improve while also shortening the time to diagnosis.
In the press release, Fujifilm stated that 85% of US healthcare organizations use analog systems for pathology. That compares with 86% in Europe and 90% in Asia, the company stated.
“Acquiring Inspirata’s digital pathology business allows Fujifilm to be an even stronger healthcare partner—bridging a technological gap between pathology, radiology, and oncology to facilitate a more collaborative approach to care delivery across the enterprise,” said Fujifilm CEO and president Teiichi Goto in the press release.
The press release cited data from Signify Research, a healthcare technology marketing data firm that is predicting the global market for digital pathology systems would double from $320 million in 2021 to $640 million by 2025.
Fujifilm previously had a deal with Inspirata to sell the Dynamyx system exclusively in the UK, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg, an August press release noted.
“A $320 million global industry in 2021 projected to reach $640 million by 2025, the rising number of cancer cases and the demonstrated benefits of digital pathology are fueling significant demand and market growth in the hospital and pharmaceutical industries,” said Henry Izawa (above), president and CEO, Fujifilm Healthcare Americas Corporation, in a press release. “These evolving clinical needs fuel Fujifilm’s investment and innovation in the digital revolution, and we look forward to introducing Dynamyx and its host of unique features and benefits to our Synapse customers and prospects as we strive to enable more efficient medical diagnosis and high-quality care.” (Photo copyright: LinkedIn.)
In announcing their new collaboration, GE Healthcare and Tribun Health said the integration of their systems—Edison Datalogue and the Tribun Health suite—would foster collaboration between pathologists and clinicians by providing a consolidated location for imaging records. This capability is especially important in oncology, they said.
“The oncology care pathway is one of the most complex with multiple steps involving a variety of specialists, complex tools, frequent decisions, and large data sets,” said GE Healthcare CEO of Enterprise Digital Solutions Nalinikanth Gollagunta in a GE press release. “With this digital pathology collaboration, we continue our journey towards simplifying the oncology care pathway with improved data management, the digitization of pathology, and streamlined data access.”
Tribun Health, based in Paris, France, offers a digital pathology platform that incorporates a camera system, artificial intelligence (AI)-based analysis, remote collaboration, and storage management, plus integration with third-party automation apps.
GE Healthcare claims that Edison Datalogue has the largest share of the Vendor Neutral Archive (VNA) market. That term refers to image archiving systems that use standard formats and interfaces instead of proprietary formats. They are an alternative to the more widely used Picture Archiving and Communications Systems (PACS) used in medical imaging.
The collaboration between the companies “is probably a strategic move to position GE as an integrator of imaging data and digital pathology data in oncology,” said Robert Michel Editor-in-Chief of Dark Daily and its sister publication The Dark Report.
GE’s History with Dynamyx
This is not GE Healthcare’s first foray into digital pathology. In fact, the company had a major hand in launching the very Dynamyx system that Fujifilm recently acquired.
In “GE Healthcare Sells Omnyx to Inspirata,” The Dark Report interviewed Inspirata CEO Satish Sanan who at that time said the acquisition would allow his company to offer “a fully integrated, end-to-end digital pathology solution” in Canada and Europe. But GE Healthcare chose to end the partnership in 2016, citing regulatory uncertainty and variable global demand. Two years later, GE sold Omnyx to Inspirata.
GE Healthcare’s new collaboration with Tribun Health shows that the company “still recognizes the value of the pathology data in cancer diagnosis and wants to be in a position to manage that digital pathology data,” Michel said.
Fujifilm’s Plans
Fujifilm said it will incorporate Dynamyx into its Synapse Enterprise Imaging suite, which includes VNA, Radiology PACS, and Cardiology PACS. “Future releases of Dynamyx will also create opportunities for Fujifilm to support pharmaceutical and contract research organizations with toxicity testing data management for drug development,” the company stated in the press release.
With its recent moves into digital pathology, Fujifilm will be taking on major competitors including Philips, Danaher, and Roche, MedTech Dive reported.
Clinical laboratories could play a key role in helping users collect their samples correctly, interpret results, and transfer flu test data to their health records
Clinical laboratories may have another opportunity to provide service to their clients and the physicians who treat them. With the success of at-home COVID-19 testing, consumer demand for self-tests is changing and advances in diagnostic technology now make it feasible to make more influenza (flu) tests available for consumers to buy and use at home.
At-home tests for SARS-CoV-2 can be found at pharmacies all across America. But that’s not the case with tests for influenza.
Should self-test flu kits eventually become available and common, clinical laboratories could offer the service of helping consumers understand:
that the test was conducted correctly (specimen collection and analysis),
“Home flu testing would ensure that those who do need and receive antiviral medication for influenza are the ones who need it the most,” and that “we are making our treatment decisions based on data,” infectious disease specialist Christina Yen, MD (above), University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, told STAT News. At-home flu self-tests could also bring opportunities for clinical laboratories to provide service to healthcare consumers and the physicians who treat them. (Photo copyright: UT Southwestern Medical Center.)
Pros and Cons of Consumers Doing At-home Influenza Testing
According to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), COVID-19 and influenza are both upper respiratory illnesses with similar symptoms. So, why don’t we have more at-home flu tests available? Partly because at-home testing is a relatively new phenomenon in modern healthcare.
“It’s really rare, and it’s really new that people are allowed to know about what’s happening inside their body without a physician in the middle,” Harvard epidemiologist Michael Mina, MD, PhD, told STAT News. The article uses the example of at-home pregnancy tests. Despite a prototype for an at-home pregnancy test being created in 1967, it took another decade before an over-the-counter pregnancy test became available to the public.
“The general thinking was, ‘How could a woman possibly know what to do if she found out she was pregnant on her own without a doctor in the room?’ That is a ridiculous concern because women have been doing that for millions of years,” Mina added.
So, why be cautious when it comes to giving patients the option of at-home flu testing?
There are some cons to at-home influenza tests. Average citizens are not clinical laboratory professionals. They might obtain too little sample for an accurate reading or read the results incorrectly. Then, there is the possibility for false-negatives or false-positives.
An at-home test user is not likely to consider the possibility of a false result, however clinicians look at the situation with more nuance. If the patient was still symptomatic or in a high-risk community, the provider could administer a more sensitive medical laboratory test to confirm the previous test results.
“In a Facebook post from mid-November with hundreds of responses, concertgoers compared symptoms and positive test results, many of those from tests taken at home. But those data weren’t added to state public health tallies of COVID’s spread,” STAT News noted.
The larger concern is that samples obtained by at-home self-test users are not submitted for genomic sequencing. This could lead to incomplete data and delay identifying new variants of the coronavirus in communities.
Another barrier to at-home flu testing is that rapid influenza diagnostic testing can be unreliable. In 2009, the rapid influenza tests could only detect the H1N1 influenza virus in a mere 11% of samples, STAT News reported. Because of this, the FDA now requires manufacturers to test their rapid tests against eight different strains that change every year depending upon which strains are prevalent. This could present a problem if individuals use leftover tests from the previous flu season.
Do Pros of At-home Testing Outweigh the Cons?
At-home testing is convenient and makes testing more accessible to patients who may not be able to get to a clinic. Being able to test at home also encourages individuals to take precautions necessary to stop the spread of whichever illness they may have. Given the similarities in symptoms between influenza and COVID-19, people could benefit from having tools at home that correctly identify their illness.
At-home COVID-19 tests are here to stay, and at-home influenza tests may be on the way soon. Clinical laboratories could play an important role in educating the public on the correct handling of these tests.
Healthcare attorneys advise medical laboratory leaders to ensure staff understand difference between EKRA and other federal fraud laws, such as the Anti-kickback Statute
More than four years have passed since Congress passed the law and yet the Eliminating Kickbacks in Recovery Act of 2018 (EKRA) continues to cause anxiety and confusion. In particular are the differences in the safe harbors between the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) and Stark Law versus EKRA. This creates uncertainty among clinical laboratory leaders as they try to understand how these disparate federal laws affect business referrals for medical testing.
According to a news alert from Tampa Bay, Florida-based law firm, Holland and Knight, “EKRA was enacted as part of comprehensive legislation designed to address the opioid crisis and fraudulent practices occurring in the sober home industry.” However, “In the four years since EKRA’s enactment, US Department of Justice (DOJ) enforcement actions have broadened EKRA’s scope beyond reducing fraud in the addiction treatment industry to include all clinical laboratory activities, including COVID-19 testing.”
It is important that medical laboratory leaders understand this law. New cases are showing up and it would be wise for clinical laboratory managers to review their EKRA/AKS/Stark Law compliance with their legal counsels.
“Keeping in mind that [EKRA is] a criminal statute, clinical laboratories need to take steps to demonstrate that they’re not intending to break the law,” said attorney David Gee, a partner at Davis Wright Tremaine, in an exclusive interview with The Dark Report. “[Lab leaders should] think about what they can do to make their sales compensation program avoid the things the government has had such a problem with, even if they’re not sure exactly how to compensate under the language of EKRA or how they’re supposed to develop a useful incentive compensation plan when they can’t pay commissions.” David Gee will be speaking about laboratory regulations and compliance at the upcoming Executive War College in New Orleans on April 25-26, 2023. (Photo copyright: Davis Wright Tremaine.)
How Does EKRA Affect Clinical Laboratories?
The federal EKRA statute—originally enacted to address healthcare fraud in addiction treatment facilities—was “expansively drafted to also apply to clinical laboratories,” according to New York-based law firm, Epstein Becker and Green. As such, EKRA “applies to improper referrals for any ‘service,’ regardless of the payor. … public as well as private insurance plans, and even self-pay patients, fall within the reach of the statute.”
In “Revised Stark Law, Anti-Kickback Statute Rules Are Good News for Labs,” Dark Daily’s sister publication The Dark Report noted that EKRA creates criminal penalties for any individual who solicits or receives any remuneration for referring a patient to a recovery home, clinical treatment facility, or clinical laboratory, or who pays or offers any remuneration to induce a referral.
According to Epstein Becker and Green, EKRA:
Applies to clinical laboratories, not just toxicology labs.
Has relevance to all payers: Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance plans, and self-pay.
Is a criminal statute with “extreme penalties” such as 10 years in prison and $200,000 fine per occurrence.
Exceptions are not concurrent with AKS.
Areas being scrutinized include COVID-19 testing, toxicology, allergy, cardiac, and genetic tests.
“For many clinical laboratories, a single enforcement action could have a disastrous effect on their business. And unlike other healthcare fraud and abuse statutes, such as the AKA, exceptions are very limited,” Epstein Becker and Green legal experts noted.
“Therefore, a lab could potentially find itself protected under an AKS safe harbor and still potentially be in violation of EKRA,” they continued. “The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the DOJ have not provided any clarity regarding this statute (EKRA). Without this much needed guidance clinical laboratories have been left wondering what they need to do to avoid liability.”
EKRA versus AKS and Stark Law
HHS compared AKS and the Stark Law (but not EKRA) by noting on its website prohibition, penalties, exceptions, and applicable federal healthcare programs for each federal law:
AKS has criminal fines of up to $25,000 per violation and up to a five-year prison term, as well as civil penalties.
The Stark Law has civil penalties only.
AKS prohibits anyone from “offering, paying, soliciting, or receiving anything of value to induce or reward referrals or generate federal healthcare program business.”
The Stark Law addresses referrals from physicians and prohibits the doctors “from referring Medicare patients for designated health services to an entity with which the physician has a financial relationship.”
EKRA is more restrictive than AKS, as it prohibits some compensation that AKS allows, healthcare attorney Emily Johnson of McDonald Hopkins in Chicago told The Dark Report.
Recent enforcement actions may help lab leaders better understand EKRA’s reach. According to Holland and Knight:
Malena Lepetich of Belle Isle, Louisiana, owner and CEO of MedLogic LLC in Baton Rouge, was indicted in a $15 million healthcare fraud scheme for “allegedly offering to pay kickbacks for COVID-19 specimens and respiratory pathogen testing.”
In S-G Labs Hawaii, LLC v. Graves, a federal court concluded the laboratory recruiter’s contract “did not violate EKRA because the recruiter was not referring individual patients but rather marketing to doctors. According to the court, EKRA only prohibits percentage-based compensation to marketers based on direct patient referrals.”
In another federal case, United States v. Mark Schena, the court’s rule on prohibition of direct and indirect referrals of patients to clinical labs sent a strong signal “that EKRA most likely prohibits clinical laboratories from paying their marketers percentage-based compensation, regardless of whether the marketer targets doctors or prospective patients.”
What can medical laboratory leaders do to ensure compliance with the EKRA law?
In EKRA Compliance, Law and Regulations for 2023, Dallas law firm Oberheiden P.C., advised clinical laboratories (as well as recovery homes and clinical treatment facilities) to have EKRA policies and procedure in place, and to reach out to staff (employed and contracted) to build awareness of statute prohibitions and risks of non-compliance.
One other useful resource for clinical laboratory executives and pathologists with management oversight of their labs’ marketing and sales programs is the upcoming Executive War College on Diagnostics, Clinical Laboratory, and Pathology Management. The conference takes place on April 25-26, 2023, at the Hyatt Regency in New Orleans. A panel of attorneys with deep experience in lab law and compliance will discuss issues associated with EKRA, the Anti-Kickback Statutes, and the Stark self-referral law.
