Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27537475›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in hematology2016

Transfusion-transmitted babesiosis: is it time to screen the blood supply?

Andrew E Levin, Peter J Krause

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in hematology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. In Vitro Monitoring of Babesia microti Infection Dynamics in Whole Blood Microenvironments.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Coinfection ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  5. Transmission risk evaluation of transfusion blood containing low-densityFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Article
  6. Role ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. HarnessingVaccines · 2022
    Review
  11. Sickle Cell Anemia andPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  12. Treatment of Human Babesiosis: Then and Now.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  13. Effective Therapy Targeting CytochromeAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Nosocomial Infections: Do Not Forget the Parasites!Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Emerging Tick-Borne Diseases.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2020
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew E LevinaImmunetics, Inc., Boston, Massachusetts bYale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Peter J Krause
Immunetics (United States) · USYale University · US

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Babesia antigen detection assay for blood screeningR44HL127698 · NHLBI · IMMUNETICS, INC. · PI KRUEGER, NEIL X · 2015 to 2017
$3.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NHLBI NIH HHS R44 HL127698
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis review summarizes the current status of blood screening to prevent transfusion-transmitted babesiosis (TTB). RECENT

findingsBabesia microti has recently been determined to be the most common transfusion-transmitted pathogen in the United States. Patients who acquire TTB often experience severe illness with an associated mortality rate of about 20%. Recent studies have demonstrated that laboratory screening using B. microti antibody and/or PCR assays can effectively identify infectious blood donors and that this approach may offer a cost- effective means of intervention. Pathogen inactivation methods may offer an alternative solution. None of these methods has yet been licensed by US Food and Drug Administration, however, and current efforts to prevent TTB rely on excluding blood donors who report having had babesiosis. SUMMARY: TTB imposes a significant health burden on the United States population. Further research is needed to better inform decisions on optimal screening strategies and reentry criteria, but given the acute need and the currently available screening tools, initiation of blood donor screening to prevent TTB should be given high priority.

Indexed as

Transfusion ReactionBabesia microtiBabesiosisBlood DonorsCost-Benefit AnalysisEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayFluorescent Antibody TechniqueHumansMass ScreeningReferral and ConsultationSeroepidemiologic StudiesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID27537475
PMCPMC5241272
OpenAlexW2517174901

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.