Guidance for Industry 

Use of Nucleic Acid Tests to Reduce the Risk of 

Transmission of West Nile Virus from Donors of 

Whole Blood and Blood Components Intended 

for Transfusion and Donors of Human Cells, 

Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products 

(HCT/Ps) 

DRAFT GUIDANCE 

This guidance is for comment purposes only. 

Submit comments on this draft guidance by the date provided in the Federal Register notice 

announcing the availability of the draft guidance. Submit written comments to the Division of 

Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, 

Rockville, MD 20852. Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov. You should 

identify all comments with the docket number listed in the notice of availability that published in 

the Federal Register. 

Additional copies of this draft guidance are available from the Office of Communication, 

Training and Manufacturers Assistance (HFM-40), 1401 Rockville Pike, Suite 200N, Rockville, 

MD 20852-1448, or by calling 1-800-835-4709 or 301-827-1800, or from the Internet at 

http://www.fda.gov/cber/guidelines.htm. 

For questions on the scientific content of this guidance regarding blood donors, contact Maria 

Rios, Ph.D., in the Division of Emerging and Transfusion Transmitted Diseases, Office of Blood 

Research and Review at 301-827-3008. For questions regarding labeling or licensing issues, 

contact the Division of Blood Applications, Office of Blood Research and Review at 301-827-

3524. For questions regarding HCT/P donors, contact Melissa Greenwald, M.D., in the Division 

of Human Tissues, Office of Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies at 301-827-2002. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

Food and Drug Administration 

Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research 

April 2008
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

Table of Contents

I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1

II. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 2

A. Whole Blood and Blood Components ................................................................. 3

B. HCT/Ps................................................................................................................... 4

III. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DONATIONS OF WHOLE BLOOD AND BLOOD 

COMPONENTS................................................................................................................ 4

A. Testing, Unit Management, and Donor Management ....................................... 4

B. Converting from MP-NAT to ID-NAT ............................................................... 6

C. Reporting Test Implementation .......................................................................... 7

D. Labeling of Whole Blood and Blood Components Intended for Transfusion. 7

IV. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TESTING OF HCT/P DONORS.............................. 11

V. IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................................................... 11

VI. REFERENCES................................................................................................................ 12

i 
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

Guidance for Industry 

Use of Nucleic Acid Tests to Reduce the Risk of Transmission of 

West Nile Virus from Donors of Whole Blood and Blood 

Components Intended for Transfusion and Donors of Human Cells, 

Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products (HCT/Ps) 

This draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) 

current thinking on this topic. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and 

does not operate to bind FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if the 

approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. If you want to 

discuss an alternative approach, contact the appropriate FDA staff. If you cannot identify the 

appropriate FDA staff, call the appropriate number listed on the title page of this guidance. 

I. INTRODUCTION 

We, FDA, are issuing this guidance to provide you1 with recommendations for testing of 

donations of Whole Blood and blood components and HCT/P donor specimens for West Nile 

Virus (WNV) using an FDA licensed donor screening assay. We believe that the use of a 

licensed nucleic acid test (NAT) will reduce the risk of transmission of WNV, and therefore 

recommend that you use a licensed NAT to screen donors of Whole Blood and blood 

components intended for transfusion and for testing donors of HCT/Ps for infection with WNV. 

We recommend that you implement NAT testing for WNV within 6 months after a final 

guidance is issued. 

The recommendations in Section III of this guidance apply to all donations of Whole Blood (as 

defined in Title 21 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 640.1) and blood components for 

transfusion2

. The recommendations in Section IV of this guidance apply to HCT/Ps and 

supplement the recommendations in the “Guidance for Industry: Eligibility Determination for 

Donors of Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products (HCT/Ps),” dated 

August 8, 2007 (Ref. 1). 

FDA’s guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable 

responsibilities. Instead, guidances describe the FDA’s current thinking on a topic and should be 

viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are cited. 

The use of the word should in FDA’s guidances means that something is suggested or 

recommended, but not required. 

 

1

 This guidance is intended for establishments that collect Whole Blood and blood components intended for 

transfusion and establishments that make donor eligibility determinations for donors of human cells, tissues, and 

cellular and tissue-based products (HCT/Ps).

2

 This guidance does not apply to Source Plasma or plasma derivatives.

1
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

II. BACKGROUND 

WNV first appeared in the United States in 1999 and has become endemic with high viral 

activity during the warm months of the year. WNV is a mosquito-borne agent that is maintained 

in nature primarily between birds and mosquitoes but can also infect other animals, including 

humans. The potential for WNV transmission by blood transfusion during the acute phase of 

infection, when infected individuals are viremic and asymptomatic, was first recognized in 2002 

(Ref. 2). At that time, test kit manufacturers and blood organizations, with input from the Public 

Health Service (National Institutes of Health, FDA, and Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC)), actively pursued development of NAT systems for WNV. Retrospective 

studies have subsequently confirmed human-to-human transmission of WNV by blood 

transfusion and by organ transplantation (Refs. 3, 4). 

Nationwide clinical studies to evaluate a NAT for the detection of WNV were initiated in 2003, 

under FDA’s Investigational New Drug Application (IND) regulations (21 CFR Part 312). Such 

large-scale studies were necessary to help assure blood safety and to determine the efficacy of 

investigational assays to prevent the transmission of WNV through blood transfusion, because at 

that time there was no FDA-licensed screening assay available to detect WNV infection. 

Since 2005, FDA has approved biologics license applications for two NAT assays for detecting 

WNV ribonucleic acid (RNA) using plasma specimens from human donors of blood, organs and 

tissues, and from other living donors. The assays are intended for use in testing individual donor 

samples and for use in testing pools of human plasma comprised of equal aliquots of not more 

than either 6 or 16 individual donations (minipools) from volunteer donors of whole blood and 

blood components depending, on the manufacturer. Both assays also are intended for use in 

testing individual plasma specimens from organ donors when specimens are obtained while the 

donor’s heart is still beating. One of the assays also has been licensed for testing individual 

blood specimens from cadaveric (non-heart-beating) donors. 

As explained below in Section III, if the result of a licensed minipool NAT (MP-NAT) is 

reactive, and subsequent testing of the individual donation(s) (ID-NAT) comprising the tested 

minipool is reactive, then FDA would recommend treating the reactive unit(s) as though they are 

infectious. 

Evaluation of additional testing performed on specimens that were reactive on screening by IDNAT has shown that the sensitivity of repeat ID-NAT on index donation specimens (i.e., the 

same or an independent specimen from the index donation), using either the same screening 

assay or an equally sensitive alternate NAT, together with a test result for antibody to WNV, has 

a positive predictive value of 98% (Ref. 5). 

 

Current data indicate that up to 10% of donors who have a reactive ID-NAT that fails to be 

reactive on repeat testing by ID-NAT actually are infected, based on the presence of antibodies 

to WNV either in the index donation (ca. 8%) or on a follow-up test (ca. 2%) (Ref. 5). 

Therefore, as described below, we consider it appropriate in such cases to perform repeat ID2
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

NAT and WNV antibody testing prior to counseling the donor regarding his or her WNV status, 

and, in some cases, encourage additional follow-up testing. 

A. Whole Blood and Blood Components 

In 2002, there were 23 confirmed cases of WNV transmission by blood and blood components 

(Ref. 3). In 2003, only six transmissions of WNV by transfusion were documented (Ref. 6) 

following nationwide implementation of screening for WNV by MP-NAT under an IND in July 

2003. Retrospective studies using ID-NAT to test specimens collected during that season, which 

had been MP-NAT non-reactive, identified additional reactive donations and indicated that up to 

25% of viremic units were not detected by MP-NAT, presumably due to low viral load (Ref. 7). 

Results of these studies show that for detecting WNV, ID-NAT has greater sensitivity than MPNAT. 

As a result, ID-NAT may identify additional reactive donations not detected by MP-NAT. 

However, limitations in reagent availability, and personnel and logistical issues related to blood 

donor screening may not allow full implementation of ID-NAT. During test development and 

implementation under IND, MP-NAT of plasma samples (pools of 6 or 16 samples), rather than 

ID-NAT, was the only feasible format for performing the test. In addition, testing using the MPNAT format was similar to the assay platforms being used for human immunodeficiency virus 

type 1 (HIV-1) NAT and hepatitis C virus (HCV) NAT at that time. As reagent availability 

increases, technology advances, and personnel and logistical issues related to blood donor 

screening diminish, ID-NAT for all blood and blood components, using a licensed NAT yearround may become feasible and practical. 

Although year-round ID-NAT testing of all blood and blood components may not be currently 

feasible, we believe that ID-NAT on a limited basis during periods of high WNV activity to 

maximize the benefit to the public health is more practicable. Statistical analyses were 

performed on the data from the retrospective studies described above to establish criteria for 

defining high WNV activity in a particular geographic region (Ref. 8). These criteria were used 

as a “trigger” for ID-NAT implementation and for reversion to MP-NAT testing when the high 

WNV activity in that region subsided. Since 2004, ID-NAT has been implemented in those 

geographic regions of high WNV activity during epidemic periods (Refs. 8, 9) when a threshold 

was reached, triggering a switch from MP-NAT to ID-NAT. The threshold was usually based on 

the number of MP-NAT-reactive screening test results obtained during a one-week interval or on 

a cumulative rate for ID-NAT reactive screening test results attained in a particular region (Ref. 

5). 

After selective implementation of ID-NAT during epidemic seasons, there were three additional 

transmissions of WNV by transfusion between 2004 and 2006: one in 2004 and two in 2006. 

The WNV transmission in 2004 resulted from a non-reactive MP-NAT donation, subsequently 

found to be ID-NAT reactive, from which red blood cells were transfused. Plasma from the 

donation retrospectively tested reactive by ID-NAT. However, ID-NAT had not yet been 

implemented (Ref. 10). The two WNV transmissions in 2006 resulted from a non-reactive MPNAT donation from which red blood cells and fresh frozen plasma were transfused to two 

3
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

immunosuppressed recipients (Ref. 11). Investigation of the 2006 cases showed that: 1) there 

were no established methods of communication linking WNV MP-NAT data from multiple 

collecting and testing facilities serving overlapping or adjacent geographic areas; and 2) if 

efficient communication mechanisms had been in place, the corresponding collection area would 

have reached the trigger for ID-NAT, and the WNV-contaminated components would likely 

have been detected and removed from the blood supply (Ref. 5). 

B. HCT/Ps 

In August 2007, we published a guidance entitled, “Guidance for Industry: Eligibility 

Determination for Donors of Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products 

(HCT/Ps)” (Ref. 1). In that guidance we determined WNV to be a “relevant communicable 

disease agent or disease” for HCT/Ps even though WNV is not specifically listed in the 

regulations under 21 CFR 1271.3(r)(1). This determination was based on the fact that WNV 

meets the definition of a relevant communicable disease in 21 CFR 1271.3(r)(2) regarding risk of 

transmission (21 CFR 1271.3(r)(2)(i)), severity of effect (see 21 CFR 1271.3(r)(2)(ii)), and 

availability of appropriate screening measures or tests (see 21 CFR 1271.3(r)(2)(iii)). The 

August 2007 guidance contained specific recommendations for donor screening for WNV but 

not for donor testing. However, we noted that a donor screening test for WNV using NAT 

technology had been licensed for use in living and cadaveric HCT/P donors and that IND studies 

were also ongoing for the development of other NAT screening tests for WNV. We also 

indicated in the August 2007 guidance that we might recommend routine use of appropriate 

licensed donor screening test(s) to detect acute infections with WNV using a NAT once such 

tests were available. 

III. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DONATIONS OF WHOLE BLOOD AND BLOOD 

COMPONENTS 

NAT testing of donations of Whole Blood and blood components for WNV involves the use of 

defined pooling and testing systems. We recognize that licensed testing technology in semiautomated or fully automated format is not universally available, and that if you are currently 

performing NAT for WNV under an IND you would need time to fully implement a licensed 

system with all approved components, including the supporting software cleared as a device. If 

you are therefore using some, but not all, of the licensed or cleared components, you should 

continue your existing IND and report the use of the licensed assay or the related cleared 

components as an amendment to your existing IND. When you implement all licensed or cleared 

components of the test system, you may withdraw the IND in accordance with the procedures 

provided in 21 CFR 312.38. 

A. Testing, Unit Management, and Donor Management 

1. We recommend that you screen year-round for WNV using a licensed NAT on 

donor samples of Whole Blood and blood components intended for transfusion. 

In general, you may use either MP-NAT or ID-NAT for screening (see Figure 1 

4
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

and Table 1), except that we recommend that you implement ID-NAT during high 

WNV activity in your region (using a previously defined geographic area). See 

section B below for specific recommendations on when to convert to ID-NAT if 

you use MP-NAT. 

2. If you perform screening using MP-NAT, you may release all units whose test 

samples comprise a non-reactive minipool, if those units are otherwise suitable for 

release. 

We recommend that you resolve a NAT-reactive minipool using ID-NAT to 

identify the unit(s) that led to the reactivity of the minipool. Based on the IDNAT results, we recommend the following: 

a. You may release all ID-NAT non-reactive units if they are otherwise suitable 

for release. 

b. If one or more individual donation(s) is (are) reactive, we recommend that you 

discard the unit(s), defer the donor(s) for a period of 120 days and retrieve and 

quarantine in-date products from prior collections dating back 120 days prior 

to the donation that is ID-NAT-reactive. Prior to notifying the donor of his or 

her deferral and counseling the donor, we recommend that you perform 

additional testing on the specimen from the index donation using the same IDNAT or using an alternate NAT with sensitivity equal to or greater than that of 

the screening assay. We also encourage you to test the specimen using a 

cleared test for antibodies to WNV (see Figure 1 and Table 2). 

i. If the repeat ID-NAT is reactive, we recommend that you notify the donor 

of his or her deferral and that you counsel the donor that he or she tests 

positive for WNV infection. 

ii. If the repeat ID-NAT is non-reactive but the test for antibodies to WNV is 

reactive, we recommend that you notify the donor of his or her deferral 

and that you counsel the donor that he or she tested positive for WNV 

infection. 

Note: Members of the Japanese Encephalitis (JE) serogroup (Saint Louis 

Encephalitis virus, Japanese Encephalitis virus, Murray Valley 

Encephalitis virus and Kunjin virus) may present antibodies that are 

cross-reactive on the test for antibodies to WNV (Refs. 12, 13). 

Therefore, reactivity in a WNV antibody test may not be conclusive for 

WNV infection. 

iii. If the repeat ID-NAT is non-reactive and the test for antibodies to WNV is 

also non-reactive, the test results are inconclusive. We recommend that 

you notify the donor of his or her deferral and inform the donor about a 

5
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

possible infection with WNV. We encourage you to offer the donor 

additional counseling and follow-up testing using both ID-NAT and a 

cleared test for WNV antibodies on a new specimen obtained at least 30 

days after the initially reactive index donation. 

Note: In the event that the NAT screening assay does not discriminate 

between WNV and other Flaviviruses that belong to the JE serogroup 

(namely, Saint Louis Encephalitis virus, Japanese Encephalitis virus, 

Murray Valley Encephalitis virus and Kunjin virus), we encourage you 

to use a WNV-specific discriminatory NAT assay to assist donor 

counseling.

3. If you perform screening using ID-NAT, we recommend that you follow the steps 

in 2.a. and 2.b. for testing, unit management, and donor management. 

B. Converting from MP-NAT to ID-NAT 

1. We recommend that you convert from MP-NAT to ID-NAT if there is one (1) 

WNV NAT-reactive individual donation(s) from your region. 

NOTE: To define the geographic area in which to implement ID-NAT you may 

consider using the donor’s residential zip code or county, or other well specified 

region of comparable size that includes the donor’s residence. Although exposure 

to WNV may occur at any location, it is reasonable to assume that exposure most 

likely occurred while the donor was near his or her residence because mosquito 

activity is highest at dawn and dusk, times when many donors are at home. 

Mechanisms for initiating ID-NAT that utilize defined geographic areas based on 

residential zip codes, county, or other comparable well specified regions provide a 

standardized method for collecting data on number of NAT-reactive donations 

and number of donations tested. 

In addition to the use of this criterion, consideration of other epidemiological data 

may be useful to “trigger” the conversion from MP-NAT to ID-NAT, if such data 

are available. Examples include the number of clinical cases or the number of 

positive birds or mosquito pools reported in a particular geographic area, as well 

as prior ID-NAT implementation history. 

You should apply uniform criteria for converting from WNV MP-NAT to IDNAT when the threshold has been met or exceeded in a defined geographic area. 

Collecting facilities that share geographic collection areas should consider a 

communication plan so that data from overlapping and adjacent collection areas 

may be shared and used to determine whether the trigger for implementing IDNAT has been met.

6
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

2. We recommend that you convert from MP-NAT to ID-NAT within 24 hours of 

obtaining the test result(s) that caused the threshold for implementing ID-NAT to 

be met or exceeded. 

3. If you obtain WNV NAT-reactive test result(s) for individual donation(s) more 

than 24 hours after collection of the individual donation(s), we recommend that 

you consider retrospective ID-NAT testing of retained samples from donations 

collected between the date of collection of those donations whose test results 

caused the threshold for implementing ID-NAT to be met or exceeded and the 

date of actual ID-NAT implementation.

4. If you wish to revert to MP-NAT testing, we recommend that you do so when the 

high WNV activity in the defined geographic area has subsided (for example, 

when a minimum of 7 days has passed without a single WNV ID-NAT-reactive 

donation). 

C. Reporting Test Implementation 

1. If you are a licensed blood establishment and are already FDA approved to 

perform infectious disease testing of blood products, you may use at your facility 

a licensed WNV NAT according to the manufacturer’s product insert at your 

facility, and you must notify us in your annual report of the testing change in 

accordance with 21 CFR 601.12(d). Also, if you have already filed a supplement 

to your Biologics License Application to use a contract laboratory to perform 

infectious disease testing of blood products, and the contract laboratory will now 

perform a NAT for WNV, you must report this change in your annual report (21 

CFR 601.12(d)). 

2. If you are a licensed blood establishment and you use a new contract laboratory to 

perform a NAT for WNV and the laboratory already performs infectious disease 

testing for blood products, then you must report this change to FDA, and may do 

so through submission of a “Supplement – Changes Being Effected” in 

accordance with 21 CFR 601.12(c)(1) and (5), also known as changes being 

effected immediately (CBE). If your contract laboratory previously has not 

performed infectious disease testing for blood products, then you must submit this 

change in a prior approval supplement (PAS) in accordance with 21 CFR 

601.12(b). 

D. Labeling of Whole Blood and Blood Components Intended for Transfusion 

 Title 21 CFR 606.122(h) requires that an instruction circular, also known as the “Circular 

of Information,” for blood products intended for transfusion include the names and 

results of all tests performed when necessary for safe and effective use. To comply with 

21 CFR 606.122(h), upon implementation of a licensed NAT for WNV, both licensed and 

unlicensed blood establishments must revise such instruction circular to include the non7
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

8

reactive results of a NAT for WNV. If you are a licensed blood establishment, you may 

submit this labeling as a CBE (21 CFR 601.12(c)(1) and (5)), provided the revision is 

identical to the following statement: 

“A Licensed Nucleic Acid Test (NAT) for West Nile Virus (WNV) RNA has 

been performed and found to be non-reactive.” 

If you are a licensed blood establishment and you wish to use a different statement, then 

you must submit the labeling change as a PAS (21 CFR 601.12(b)). If you are an 

unlicensed blood establishment, you must revise the instruction circular under 21 CFR 

606.122(h), but you are not required to submit the revision as a supplement. 
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

Figure 1. Recommendations on Testing, Unit Management, and Donor Management for 

Whole Blood and Blood Components 

* In the event that the screening assay does not discriminate between WNV and other JE serogroup 

viruses, we encourage you to use a WNV-specific discriminatory assay to assist with donor counseling.

** Please note that there is high degree of cross-reactivity among different Flaviviruses. 

Test blood donations using a 

licensed MP-NAT for WNV

MP-NAT reactive 

If suitable, release 

unit (s) for 

transfusion. 

 Test each specimen in the pool by ID-NAT 

ID-NAT reactive unit(s) 

ID-NAT 

non-reactive 

unit(s) 

Perform additional testing on index donation specimen prior to notifying and counseling the 

donor using: 

 1. The same ID-NAT assay or an alternate NAT* of comparable sensitivity; and 

2. A cleared test for antibodies to WNV.

Discard unit(s). 

Defer donor(s) for 120 days. 

Retrieve in-date products 

from prior collections dating 

back 120 days.

MP-NAT 

non-reactive 

Repeat ID-NAT nonreactive & Antibody 

test Reactive**

Repeat ID-NAT non-reactive 

& Antibody test non-reactive

Repeat ID-NAT reactive* 

& Antibody test reactive 

or non-reactive 

Notify the donor of deferral and counsel 

the donor as testing Positive for WNV 

Notify the donor of deferral and counsel the donor as

inconclusive for WNV infection. Encourage that 

donor return after at least 30 days for follow-up 

testing on a new specimen using ID-NAT and a 

cleared test for antibodies to WNV. 

Test blood donations 

using a licensed ID-NAT 

for WNV 

ID-NAT 

non-reactive 

If suitable, release unit 

for transfusion. 

9
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

Table 1. Recommendations on Testing, Unit Management, and Donor Management for 

Blood and Blood Components

 MP- NAT ID-NAT Actions 

 Reactive Reactive unit(s) Discard the unit(s). 

 Defer the donor(s) for 120 days. 

Retrieve in-date products from prior collections 

dating back 120 days. 

 

Perform additional testing using an ID-NAT and a 

cleared test for antibodies to WNV (see Table 2). 

 Non-Reactive unit(s) If suitable, release units for transfusion. 

 Non-Reactive Not needed If suitable, release units for transfusion. 

 

Table 2. Recommendations on Additional Testing of Blood and Blood Components 

Repeat ID-NAT* Test for Antibodies to WNV Donor Status 

Reactive Reactive WNV Positive 

 Non-Reactive WNV Positive 

Non-Reactive Reactive WNV Positive** 

 Non-Reactive Inconclusive*** 

 

* Using either the ID-NAT screening assay or an alternate NAT of equal or greater sensitivity. In the 

event that the screening assay does not discriminate between WNV and other Flaviviruses that 

belongs to the JE serogroup, we encourage you to use a WNV-specific discriminatory assay to assist 

with donor counseling. 

** Please note that there is high degree of cross-reactivity among different Flaviviruses. 

*** Due to the potential for false negative test results, encourage that donor return after at least 30 days 

for follow-up testing on a new specimen using ID-NAT and a cleared test for antibodies to WNV. 

Counsel the donor about their WNV status.

10
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

 

IV. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TESTING OF HCT/P DONORS3

1. We recommend that blood specimens from all HCT/P donors be tested year-round for 

WNV by ID-NAT using a licensed screening NAT test. 

2. Any HCT/P donor whose specimen tests non-reactive by ID-NAT may be considered 

to be negative for WNV for purposes of determining donor eligibility. 

3. We recommend that any HCT/P donor whose specimen tests reactive by ID-NAT be 

ineligible for donation. 

V. IMPLEMENTATION 

We recommend that you implement this guidance within 6 months after a final guidance is 

issued. 

3

 Recommendations regarding donor screening for WNV can be found in “Guidance for Industry: Eligibility 

Determination for Donors of Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products (HCT/Ps)”, Sections 

IV. E, F and G (Ref. 1).

11
Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 

Draft – Not for Implementation 

VI. REFERENCES 

1. Food and Drug Administration, Guidance for Industry: Eligibility Determination for Donors 

of Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products (HCT/Ps) (August 2007). 

http://www.fda.gov/cber/tissue/docs.htm. 

2. Biggerstaff BJ, Petersen LR, Estimated Risk of West Nile Virus Transmission Through 

Blood Transfusion During an Epidemic in Queens, New York City. Transfusion. 42:1019-26 

(2002). 

3. Pealer LN, et al., Transmission of West Nile Virus Through Blood Transfusion in the United 

States in 2002. N Engl J Med. 349:1236-45 (2003). 

4. Iwamoto M, et al., Transmission of West Nile Virus From an Organ Donor to Four 

Transplant Recipients. N Engl J Med. 348, 2196-2203 (2003). 

5. Blood Products Advisory Committee, 89th Meeting, April 27, 2007. 

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/cber07.htm#BloodProducts. 

6. Macedo de Oliveira A, et al., West Nile Virus Blood Transfusion-Related Infection Despite 

Nucleic Acid Testing. Transfusion. 44:1695-99 (2004). 

7. Stramer SL, et al., West Nile Virus Among Blood Donors in the United States, 2003 and 

2004. N Engl J Med. 353:451-59 (2005). 

8. Custer B, et al., Triggers for Switching from Minipool Testing by Nucleic Acid Technology 

to Individual-Donation Nucleic Acid Testing for West Nile Virus: Analysis of 2003 Data to 

Inform 2004 Decision Making. Transfusion. 44:1547-54 (2004). 

9. Busch MP, et al., Screening the Blood Supply for West Nile Virus RNA by Nucleic Acid 

Amplification Testing. N Engl J Med. 353:460-67 (2005). 

10. MMWR 2004 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Transfusion-Associated 

Transmission of West Nile Virus --- Arizona, 2004. MMWR. 53(36):842-44 (2004). 

11. MMWR 2007 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. West Nile Virus Transmission – 

South Dakota, 2006. MMWR. 56(04):76-79 (2007). 

12. Holmes DA, et al., Comparative Analysis of Immunoglobulin M (IgM) Capture EnzymeLinked Immunosorbent Assay Using Virus-Like Particles or Virus-Infected Mouse Brain 

Antigens to Detect IgM Antibody in Sera from Patients with Evident Flaviviral Infections. J 

Clin Microbiol. 43(7):3227-36 (2005). 

13. Wong SJ, et al., Immunoassay Targeting Nonstructural Protein 5 to Differentiate West Nile 

Virus Infection from Dengue and St. Louis Encephalitis Virus Infections and from Flavivirus 

Vaccination. J Clin Microbiol. 41(9):4217-23 (2003). 

12