Biomedical subjects

Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study

Publications and source records attributed to Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Factors influencing the decision to donate: racial and ethnic comparisons.

BACKGROUND: Understanding factors that encourage different racial and ethnic groups to donate is crucial for donor recruitment and retention. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A 28-item self-administered questionnaire was completed in 2003 by 1862 Asian, 1479 black, 1641 Hispanic, and 2940 White US donors who had given whole blood within the past year. With a 1 to 5 scale, donors were asked to rate the importance of 17 factors in their last donation decision. Logistic regression was conducted to compare the odds of a factor being important or very important (score of 4 or 5) in one's decision to donate between race or ethnic groups, stratified by first-time and repeat status. RESULTS: More than 90 percent of each respondent group cited a desire, responsibility, or perceived duty to help others as an important or very important motivator. Being asked to donate at work was also an important motivator for all race and ethnic groups (56-70%). Getting the results of a health screen appealed to many (approx. 30% found it important or very important) and was most important to Black and Hispanic donors (odds ratios of 1.3-1.9 compared to White donors; p<0.003). CONCLUSION: Recruitment and retention programs should build on people's sense of social responsibility. Direct requests to donate are particularly effective motivators. Of a variety of incentives evaluated, offering more comprehensive health screens may motivate many donors, especially Black and Hispanic donors.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

First year donation patterns predict long-term commitment for first-time donors.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Converting first-time donors to become regular donors continues to be a challenge facing blood centres. We examined whether first-time donors with frequent return in the first 12 months were more likely to become regular donors. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The donation histories of 179 409 community whole-blood donors, whose first-time donation in 1991 was negative on donor screening tests, were evaluated. Donors were categorized by the number of donations made in the 12 months after (and including) their first donation. The donor return pattern in the subsequent 6 years, and its association with first-year donation frequency and demographics, was evaluated by using logistic regression analysis. A 'regular donor' was defined as one who returned to donate in at least 4 of the 6 years of follow-up. RESULTS: First-year donation frequency was significantly correlated with long-term donor return (P < 0.0001). Among those giving 1, 2, 3, 4 and > or = 5 donations in the first year, 4%, 11%, 21%, 32% and 42%, respectively, became regular donors (P < 0.0001). Similar associations between donation pattern and donor return behaviour were observed after adjusting for demographic variables (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Strategies aimed at encouraging current donors to donate more frequently during the first year may help to establish a regular donation behaviour.

Age Factors↗

PubMed2005

Does prevalence of transfusion-transmissible viral infection reflect corresponding incidence in United States blood donors?

BACKGROUND: Calculation of viral residual risk is dependent on estimating incidence, which is not easily obtainable by most blood centers. Prevalence, however, is readily available. Understanding whether prevalence reflects corresponding incidence may help blood centers monitor disease risks. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: With data on 12 million allogeneic donations, prevalence and incidence of transfusion-transmitted viral infections (TTVIs) were calculated. Relationships between prevalence (in total, first-time, and repeat donations) and incidence were analyzed for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) relative to temporal and donor demographic stratifications, respectively. RESULTS: Overall prevalence of HIV, HBV, and HCV did not consistently reflect corresponding incidence. The relationship between prevalence and incidence varied with time and donors' age and was virus-specific. CONCLUSION: Incidence of TTVIs cannot be easily predicted from overall prevalence. Accurate assessment of TTVI risk necessitates knowledge about donation histories and person-years at risk. Establishing comprehensive frameworks for monitoring blood donations and infectious disease markers remains a key to monitoring blood safety.

Blood Banks↗

PubMed2005

The impact of male-to-male sexual experience on risk profiles of blood donors.

BACKGROUND: Men who have had sex with men (MSM) since 1977 are permanently deferred from donating blood. Excluding only men who engaged in male-to-male sex within either the prior 12 months or 5 years has been proposed. Little is known about infectious disease risks of MSM who donate blood. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Weighted analyses of data from an anonymous mail survey of blood donors were conducted to examine the characteristics of men reporting male-to-male sex during specified time periods. RESULTS: Of the 25,168 male respondents, 569 (2.4%) reported male-to-male sex, 280 (1.2%) since 1977. Compared to donors who did not report male-to-male sex, the prevalence of reactive screening test results was higher among donors who reported the practice within the past 5 years (< or =12 months odds ratio [OR] 5.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6-10.4; >12 months to 5 years, OR 7.1, 95% CI 1.2-41.7); however, no significant difference was found for donors who last practiced male-to-male sex more than 5 years ago (>5 years-after 1977, OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.7-2.6; 1977 or earlier, OR 1.6, 95% CI 0.7-3.7). The prevalence of unreported deferrable risks (UDRs) other than male-to-male sex was significantly higher for all donors who reported male-to-male sex with ORs ranging from 3.1 to 18.9 (p < or = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: No evidence was found to support changing current policy to permit donations from men who practiced male-to-male sex within the past 5 years. For donors with a more remote history of male-to-male sex, the findings were equivocal. A better understanding of the association between male-to-male sex and other UDRs appears needed.

Blood Banks↗

PubMed2004

Mammalian brain consumption by blood donors in the United States: brains today, deferred tomorrow?

BACKGROUND: Theoretical concerns of possible variant CJD (vCJD) transmission by transfusion have led to deferral of US donors potentially exposed to the bovine spongiform encephalopathy agent. Although the efficacy of these policies is unknown, impact on blood collections has been substantial. Under the precautionary principle, deferral of donors consuming bovine (or other mam-malian) brains, possibly contaminated with the vCJD agent, might be considered. Blood donors were surveyed to determine lifetime mammalian brain consumption. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study (REDS) conducted an anonymous mail survey of 92,581 donors from eight US blood centers. RESULTS: Responses were received from 52,650 donors (57%). Of these, 6.4 percent reported lifetime brain consumption; bovine (3.6%) and hog brains (1.7%) were the most common. Bovine brain consumption varied fourfold by center (1.7-7.0%) and was highest among male (4.5%), older (age 55+, 6.5%), foreign-born (9.2%), Asian (7.2%), and Hispanic (8.6%) donors. Among bovine brain consumers, 67 percent engaged in the practice 4 times or less, 79 percent were repeat donors, and 61 percent reported giving at least 11 donations in the past 10 years. CONCLUSION: Following the precautionary principle, further steps to reduce the theoretical vCJD risk could include deferring donors who eat bovine (or other mammalian) brains. The impact of such a policy would not be trivial, especially in areas with older, foreign-born, Asian, or Hispanic donors. Cautious implementation and periodic evaluation of deferral policies is warranted.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2004

ABO and Rh(D) phenotype frequencies of different racial/ethnic groups in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Commonly quoted ABO/Rh(D) frequencies in the US are usually from relatively small studies with racial or ethnic categories often judged by name or appearance. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A 10-year demographic database that contained racial or ethnic and ABO/Rh(D) phenotype data on 3.1 million allogeneic and autologous donors giving blood at five blood centers in the US was used to compute ABO and Rh(D) phenotypes in various racial/ethnic groups. The racial or ethnic category was designated by the donor. RESULTS: The highest percentage of Group O was found in Hispanic (56.5%), North American Indian (54.6%), and black non-Hispanic (50.2%) donors. Hispanic and black non-Hispanic donors had a much lower percentage (7.3 and 7.1%, respectively) of Rh- compared to white non-Hispanic donors (17.3%). Group O Rh- and Group B Rh- were found more commonly (8.0 and 1.8%, respectively) in white non-Hispanic donors than in Hispanic (3.9 and 0.7%), black non-Hispanic (3.6 and 1.3%), and Asian (0.7 and 0.4%) donors. CONCLUSIONS: These data confirmed that the highest percentages of ORh+, BRh+/ABRh+, and Rh- are present in Hispanic, Asian, and white non-Hispanic donors, respectively. These are the largest and most accurate data of ABO/Rh(D) phenotype frequencies for the major racial/ethnic donor groups in the US.

ABO Blood-Group System↗

PubMed2004

The donor notification process from the donor's perspective.

BACKGROUND: Despite large numbers of blood donors being notified of abnormal infectious disease screening results, there has been little scientific study of the effects of this process. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: With a 28-item questionnaire, an anonymous mail survey was conducted of 4141 blood donors notified of 15 distinct categories of abnormal infectious disease screening and confirmatory test results. RESULTS: The survey had a 42 percent response rate, and 10 percent of the respondents did not recall being notified of their results. Of the 1556 respondents who recalled being notified, 27 percent contacted the blood center for further information, 60 percent discussed their results with a health care provider, and 73 percent of permanently or indefinitely deferred donors correctly understood their deferral status. Confusion and emotional upset were reported in 81 and 75 percent of notified donors, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The notification process appears to achieve most of its aims in the majority of donors. Nevertheless, some donors did not understand that they were ineligible for future donation, and many donors were confused and upset. These data indicate that the adverse impact of notifying donors about abnormal test results needs to be considered when new blood donor screening tests and confirmatory algorithms are being licensed and implemented. Further studies of the effectiveness of newer revised donor notification materials are needed.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Comparison of demographic and donation profiles and transfusion-transmissible disease markers and risk rates in previously transfused and nontransfused blood donors.

BACKGROUND: Increasing concern about transfusion transmission of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease has resulted in indefinite deferral of transfused donors in France and the UK. Little is known, however, about the impact of indefinite deferral of transfused donors on blood safety and availability in the US. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were collected on allogeneic donations at five US blood centers during 1991 through 2000. Donation characteristics, prevalence, and incidence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) were compared between transfused and nontransfused donors. Unreported deferrable risk (UDR) and reasons to donate were evaluated with data from a mail survey. RESULTS: Transfusion history was reported by 4.2 percent of donors. Prevalence and incidence of HIV and HBV were comparable between transfused and nontransfused donors. Although HCV incidence was similar in both groups, HCV prevalence was nearly three times higher in transfused than in nontransfused first-time donors. UDR and reasons to donate were similar in the two groups, except transfused donors were less likely to donate for screening test results (odds ratio, 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.3-0.8). CONCLUSION: Transfused and nontransfused donors had similar viral incidence and comparable UDR, suggesting that indefinite deferral of transfused donors would unlikely improve blood safety. Until more is known about the prevalence and transfusion transmissibility of emerging agents, indefinite deferral of previously transfused donors in the US does not appear warranted.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Attitudes toward blood donation incentives in the United States: implications for donor recruitment.

BACKGROUND: The potential effectiveness of various donation incentive programs may vary by demographics, first-time or repeat status, and collection site. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Attitudes toward future incentives were obtained from a 1998 anonymous survey sent to 92,581 US blood donors. Responses (encouraged, discouraged, no difference) to incentives were compared within demographic groups, donations sites, and between first-time and repeat community whole-blood (WB) donors using chi-square tests and logistic regressions adjusted for sample design. RESULTS: Incentives most likely to encourage donation return among all 45,588 WB respondents were blood credits (61%), cholesterol screening (61%), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening (73% of men). Younger donors (< or = 25 years old) were 4 to 5 times more likely to be encouraged to donate if offered compensatory incentives (tickets to events, discounts or lottery and/or raffle tickets), gifts, or a token of appreciation than were those donors older than 55. This age effect influenced positive attitudes toward incentives in first-time donors and in donors giving at schools, universities, or military sites. Among all donors, up to 7 to 9 percent reported they would be discouraged to return if offered compensatory incentives. CONCLUSIONS: Blood credits and cholesterol and PSA screening would be well received at all donation sites. Gifts, compensatory incentives, and tokens of appreciation appeal more to younger donors. These data may allow blood centers to optimize recruitment by tailoring limited incentive resources more effectively.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Lapsed donors: an untapped resource.

BACKGROUND: There is a clear need for methods to recruit and retain donors without compromising blood safety. Although prior studies report lower viral prevalence rates in repeat donors than those in first-time donors, it is unknown if this relationship holds after a lapse of several years between donations. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 6.4 million allogeneic donations collected at five US blood centers from 1991 through 1998 were classified by donation history (first-time vs. repeat) and by length of time between donations (lapsed interval length). The prevalence of HCV, HIV, and HBsAg was compared by donation history and lapsed interval length. The relationship between lapsed interval length and donor demographics was explored. RESULTS: Repeat donors who delayed their return for over 5 years were significantly less likely to test positive for a viral infection than were first-time donors. The likelihood of a positive test result appeared to increase steadily with lapsed interval length for HCV and HBsAg, but not for HIV. Younger, less educated, and nonwhite donors were less likely to return than others. CONCLUSIONS: Recruitment of donors who have not returned for several years could be an effective way to increase the blood supply while preserving blood safety. Understanding the relationship of donor demographics to return behavior is important for recruitment efforts.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Impact of changes in viral marker screening assays.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring the performance of routinely used infectious disease serologic tests is necessary to evaluate their effectiveness in identifying true-positive units and erroneously disqualifying safe blood donors. METHODS: With two large screening test data sets collected between 1991 and 1998 and between 1997 and 2000, the impact of changes in screening assays for HIV, HCV, and HBsAg was analyzed with regard to the prevalence of confirmed-positive, indeterminate, and confirmed-negative results and the deferral of donors with an indeterminate or negative results (donor loss). RESULTS: The prevalence of indeterminate results and donors loss increased significantly in the 6 months after introduction of an HIV-1/2 EIA. A second-generation HCV EIA increased the detection of confirmed-positive donations in repeat donors (p < 0.001) and increased the prevalence of indeterminate donations. Implementation of a third-generation HCV EIA resulted in a significant decrease in indeterminate results in first-time donors. Nonspecific test results increased when HBsAg test kits from a different manufacturer were introduced or different lots of HIV antibody screening test kits from the same manufacturer were used. CONCLUSION: Introduction of newly licensed versions of assays, switching kit manufacturers, and lot-to-lot variations have an impact on rates of deferrals of safe donors as well as sensitivity of routine screening. Before considering changes in screening tests, blood centers should be aware of, and evaluate, the potential impact on donor loss.

Antigens, Viral↗

PubMed2003

Blood-donor perceptions of health history screening with a computer-assisted self-administered interview.

BACKGROUND: Computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI) has been shown to promote disclosures of sensitive information. Using CASI to screen blood-donor candidates might encourage reports of deferrable risks without discouraging eligible donors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In 1998, an anonymous mail survey was sent to donors from eight blood centers. The relationship of donor demographics, donation history, and infectious risks (HIV test-seeking behavior, unreported deferrable risk, or reactive donor-screening test result) on attitudes toward CASI were assessed. RESULTS: Of 92,581 blood donors surveyed, 52,650 (57%) responded; of these, 4713 (7%) had an infectious risk. Among donors with risks, 29 percent felt they would be encouraged to reveal personal data, and 7 percent reported they would be discouraged from donating by CASI. Young, minority, female, and first-time donors were the most likely to report that CASI would encourage personal disclosures. Among donors without risks, 5 percent felt CASI would discourage them from donating. CONCLUSIONS: Although most donors felt their donation practices would not be influenced, CASI might reduce the proportion of donors with infectious risks by fostering personal disclosures and self-deferrals. The potential for CASI to improve donor screening and increase appropriate self-deferrals should be balanced against the possible loss of reluctant safe donors.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2003

Increasing blood availability by changing donation patterns.

BACKGROUND: There is a declining margin between US blood collections and transfusions. Donation patterns were examined to characterize returning first-time donors and predict the impact on blood availability of decreasing the number of nonreturning donors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: First-time donors giving between 1991 and 1994 were followed for 3 to 6 years. The impact of decreasing the number of nonreturning donors in a 12-month period was projected using the Poisson distribution to model the donation patterns of 539,063 donors who gave in 1995. Repeat donors were classified as "returning first-time" (gave a first-time donation within 12 months of their index donation), "established" (gave a repeat donation), and "inactive" (didn't donate in the 12 months before their index donation). RESULTS: A total of 49 percent of first-time donors did not return within 6 years. Returning first-time donors tended to be US born, white, and had more than a high school education. In 1995, 30 percent of donors were first time, 31 percent were established, 7 percent were returning first time, and 32 percent were inactive, giving 1.5, 2.4, 1.9, and 1.7 donations in 12 months, respectively. Reducing nonreturning donors by 5 percent could increase blood collections by 2.7 percent. Similarly, 15 or 25 percent reductions in nonreturns could increase collections by 8.6 or 16.0 percent, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Most donors are not giving near the donation limit. A substantial increase in donations could be achieved by a relatively small decrease in donor nonreturn. Research is needed to understand why approximately half of first-time donors donate only once.

Behavior↗

PubMed2003

Frequency of HBV DNA detection in US blood donors testing positive for the presence of anti-HBc: implications for transfusion transmission and donor screening.

BACKGROUND: An estimate of the rate of HBV DNA-positive, anti-HBc-positive units is important for evaluating the need for anti-HBc donor screening, especially in the context of HBV NAT. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: HBsAg EIA-nonreactive, anti-HBc-reactive (Corzyme, Abbott Laboratories) specimens were retrieved from a repository and were retested for anti-HBc (with PRISM HBcore, Abbott Laboratories, currently under FDA review) and anti-HBs (with PRISM Ausab, Abbott Laboratories, research assay). HBV DNA testing using a PCR assay with a greater than 95 percent detection rate of less than 50 copies per mL was performed on a subset of specimens that were PRISM HBcore-reactive and were anti-HBs- negative or reactive at less than 100 IU per L. RESULTS: A total of 395 of 1231 specimens eligible by our serologic criteria were tested by PCR. Four anti-HBs-negative specimens were PCR-positive with estimated HBV DNA copy numbers of 10 per 30 copies per mL in two specimens and 50 to 100 copies per mL in two others. The HBV DNA detection rate in anti-HBs-negative specimens was 3.7 percent, and the projected rate among all Corzyme-reactive specimens was 0.24 percent, leading to an estimated yield of 1 HBV DNA-positive, anti-HBc-positive unit in 49,000 units that were otherwise eligible for transfusion (95% CI, 1 in 16,600-1 in 152,600). CONCLUSIONS: Anti-HBc screening detects HBsAg EIA-negative, HBV-infected donors at a rate comparable to the estimated residual risk for HBV window-period infections. The low viral load in the HBV DNA-positive samples suggests that minipool NAT will not detect most potentially infectious units from anti-HBc-positive donors.

Blood Donors↗

PubMed2003

Prevalence of transfusion-transmissible viral infections in first-time US blood donors by donation site.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the donor base, infectious disease prevalence, and donation loss at various blood donation sites will help maximize blood collection efforts and blood availability. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Using donation data collected at five US blood centers, the prevalence of HIV, HTLV, HBsAg, and HCV in first-time whole-blood donations at 10 donation sites was evaluated: military, education, religious, professional, industry, services, community, health care, government, and fixed sites. Donation loss from screening test reactivity at each donation site was also evaluated. RESULTS: During the study, 1.2 million first-time whole-blood donations were collected. Military and education sites had a low prevalence of all viral markers, except for HBsAg, which was highest at education sites. Variations in viral marker prevalence among donation sites were partially explained by donor demographic differences. Donation loss varied by donation site, ranging from 3.3 percent at education sites to 6.4 percent at industry sites, indicating differential efficiency of blood collection efforts. CONCLUSION: Different rates of positive viral test results and donation loss in first-time whole-blood donors were observed at various types of donation sites. This information may be useful in estimating the yield of usable units from specific blood drives and in allocating resources to meet blood center collection goals.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Do blood donors read and understand screening educational materials?

BACKGROUND: Blood donors with high-risk behaviors may not self-defer because they failed to read or understand the screening educational materials. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In 1993, a total of 34,726 allogeneic donors responded to an anonymous mail survey of 50,162 donors that inquired about demographics, donor status, amount of the donor educational materials read, new HIV knowledge gained, and donors' opinions on the length and difficulty of materials. RESULTS: Although 78 percent reported reading all materials, only 32 percent indicated reading carefully; 34 percent learned new information about HIV and 95 percent perceived the materials as easy to understand. First-time donors were more likely to read carefully (OR, 7.9) and gain more HIV knowledge from the materials (OR, 1.9) than repeat donors. Minority, less educated, screening test-reactive, and HIV test-seeking donors reported reading the materials more carefully and learning more about HIV than their respective counterparts. Donors with less education, those with reactive screening tests, those seeking HIV test results, and those not reporting a risk behavior were more likely to find the materials difficult to understand. CONCLUSION: Most donors reported skimming and not having difficulty understanding the educational materials. Some donors may be aware that they should not donate or are failing to assimilate the information in the materials. Methods to present information more clearly and concisely are clearly needed. However, some high-risk donors may still continue donating no matter how improved the educational materials are.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗

PubMed2003

HCV viral load in anti-HCV-reactive donors and infectivity for their recipients.

BACKGROUND: An attempt has been made to determine the minimum level of HCV nucleic acid in donors associated with infection of recipients. This is important for considerations about assay sensitivity, use of minipool versus single-donation testing, and continued use of serologic testing. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 5387 specimens from the Transfusion-Transmitted Viruses Study in the 1970s were screened for antibody to HCV (anti-HCV). The outcome in recipients of seroreactive donations was examined for viremia and seroconversion. Present techniques for both groups included third-generation EIA, RIBA, quantitative RT-PCR assay, and transcription-mediated amplification (TMA) assay. RESULTS: A total of 156 recipients of components from 180 anti-HCV-reactive donors were identified. One-hundred seven of these were HCV-naïve before transfusion and received a single, confirmed seropositive unit; 94 (88%) became infected. Eighty-five recipients had donors whose HCV RNA level was quantifiable by RT-PCR (range, 182-3,310,000 copies/mL). Eighty-three (98%) seroconverted. Of the remaining 22, a total of 10 received units positive for HCV RNA detected only by TMA; all 10 recipients seroconverted. Of the remaining 12 recipients of anti-HCV+, TMA-negative units, 1 recipient seroconverted. CONCLUSIONS: High rates of transmission were seen at all levels of viremia, and one donor transmitted with undetectable levels in the TMA assay. Current HCV RNA testing will therefore not interdict all infectious units, even with single-donation testing, and serologic screening must be continued.

Blood Donors↗

PubMed2003

Multicenter comparison of serologic assays and estimation of human herpesvirus 8 seroprevalence among US blood donors.

BACKGROUND: As part of assessing the possibility of transfusion transmission of human herpesvirus 8 (HHV-8 or Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus), HHV-8 seroprevalence was estimated among US blood donors, the performance of HHV-8 serologic tests was compared, and the presence of HHV-8 DNA was tested for in donated blood. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Replicate panels of 1040 plasma specimens prepared from 1000 US blood donors (collected in 1994 and 1995) and 21 Kaposi's sarcoma patients were tested for antibodies to HHV-8 in six laboratories. HHV-8 PCR was performed on blood samples from 138 donors, including all 33 who tested seropositive in at least two laboratories and 22 who tested positive in at least one. RESULTS: The estimated HHV-8 seroprevalence among US blood donors was 3.5 percent (95% CI, 1.2%-9.8%) by a conditional dependence latent-class model, 3.0 percent (95% CI, 2.0%-4.6%) by a conditional independence latent-class model, and 3.3 percent (95% CI, 2.3%-4.6%) by use of a consensus-derived gold standard (specimens positive in two or more laboratories); the conditional dependence model best fit the data. In this model, laboratory specificities ranged from 96.6 to 100 percent. Sensitivities ranged widely, but with overlapping 95 percent CIs. HHV-8 DNA was detected in blood from none of 138 donors evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Medical and behavioral screening does not eliminate HHV-8-seropositive persons from the US blood donor pool, but no viral DNA was found in donor blood. Further studies of much larger numbers of seropositive individuals will be required to more completely assess the rate of viremia and possibility of HHV-8 transfusion transmission. Current data do not indicate a need to screen US blood donors for HHV-8.

Antibodies, Viral↗