4.7 Article

Ten Years of External Quality Assessment of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 RNA Quantification

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 50, Issue 11, Pages 3614-3619

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01221-12

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Viral load testing is an essential parameter in guiding antiretroviral therapy for individuals infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). An external quality assessment scheme for the molecular quantification of HIV-1 RNA was introduced by the United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Service for Microbiology in 2000. Specimen pairs of freeze-dried plasma were distributed to a median of 141 participants three times a year. The aim of this study was to analyze the quantification of HIV-1 RNA results between 2000 and 2010. Overall variability, measured by the standard deviations of all viral load results for each specimen, was below 0.5 log copy/ml (n = 48). When we compared assay results, the medians of the viral load by assay were within a range of 0.25 to 1.08 log copies/ml, with the lowest median values being consistently reported with the Siemens branched-chain DNA assay. The spread of participant results and, hence, differences between assay medians were greater when quantifying non-B subtypes. Laboratories were scored on the proximity of their reported log difference for the specimen pair to the median log difference reported by all laboratories. The overall level of performance with the HIV-1 RNA specimens over the past 10 years has been consistently good, with more than 90% of the participants reporting in the accepted range (median difference, +/- 0.5 log unit). Future distributions may result in tightening the acceptance levels of quantification and the use of more challenging specimens, including a variety of subtypes, with developments focusing on maintaining the clinical relevance and educational value of the scheme.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available