Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-6mz5d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-15T11:41:56.701Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Incidence of West Nile virus infection in the Dallas–Fort Worth metropolitan area during the 2012 epidemic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2016

P. C. WILLIAMSON*
Affiliation:
Creative Testing Solutions, Tempe, AZ, USA
B. CUSTER
Affiliation:
Blood Systems Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, USA
B. J. BIGGERSTAFF
Affiliation:
Division of Vector-Borne Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, CO, USA
R. S. LANCIOTTI
Affiliation:
Division of Vector-Borne Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, CO, USA
M. H. SAYERS
Affiliation:
Carter BloodCare, Bedford, TX, USA The University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA
S. J. EASON
Affiliation:
Carter BloodCare, Bedford, TX, USA
M. R. DIXON
Affiliation:
Creative Testing Solutions, Bedford, TX, USA
V. WINKELMAN
Affiliation:
Creative Testing Solutions, Tempe, AZ, USA
M. C. LANTERI
Affiliation:
Blood Systems Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, USA
L. R. PETERSEN
Affiliation:
Division of Vector-Borne Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, CO, USA
M. P. BUSCH
Affiliation:
Blood Systems Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, USA
*
* Author for correspondence: Dr P. C. Williamson, Creative Testing Solutions, 2424 W. Erie Drive, Tempe, AZ 85282, USA. (Email: pwilliamson@mycts.org)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The 2012 West Nile virus (WNV) epidemic was the largest since 2003 and the North Texas region was the most heavily impacted. We conducted a serosurvey of blood donors from four counties in the Dallas–Fort Worth area to characterize the epidemic. Blood donor specimens collected in November 2012 were tested for WNV-specific antibodies. Donors positive for WNV-specific IgG, IgM, and neutralizing antibodies were considered to have been infected in 2012. This number was adjusted using a multi-step process that accounted for timing of IgM seroreversion determined from previous longitudinal studies of WNV-infected donors. Of 4971 donations screened, 139 (2·8%) were confirmed WNV IgG positive, and 69 (1·4%) had IgM indicating infection in 2012. After adjusting for timing of sampling and potential seroreversion, we estimated that 1·8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1·5–2·2] of the adult population in the Dallas–Fort Worth area were infected during 2012. The resulting overall estimate for the ratio of infections to reported WNV neuroinvasive disease (WNND) cases was 238:1 (95% CI 192–290), with significantly increased risk of WNND in older age groups. These findings were very similar to previous estimates of infections per WNND case, indicating no change in virulence as WNV evolved into an endemic infection in the United States.

Information

Type
Original Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Number of reported WNV neuroinvasive disease (WNND) cases by week of symptom onset from 12 May (beginning of week 19) to 7 December (end of week 48), 2012; Collin, Dallas, Denton and Tarrant counties. The grey bar indicates the timing of the serosurvey sample collection period. MMWR, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/index.html); TMA, transcription-mediated amplification.

Figure 1

Table 1. Proportion of persons with serological evidence of previous WNV exposure (WNV IgG+) and with evidence of infection in 2012 (WNV IgG+ and IgM+) and dengue exposure (DENV PRNT+), by race/ethnicity, gender, age, and county of residence

Figure 2

Fig. 2. Expected proportion of IgM-positive donations by date (month/year), with the beginning of the months indicated. The heavy solid line (–––) represents the proportion, with dashed lines (- - -) indicating 95% confidence bands of infected donors expected to be IgM-positive over time accounting for IgM seroreversion. The thin solid line (–––) represents the proportion of infected donors who would be IgM positive if IgM positivity did not wane. The grey bar represents the timing of the donor survey.

Figure 3

Table 2. Comparison of WNV-to-WNND ratios, by gender and age, from donors with evidence of infection in 2012 and those described in the Carson et al. [4] serosurvey