Performance of NucliSens HIV-1 EasyQ Version 2.0 Compared with Six Commercially Available Quantitative Nucleic Acid Assays for Detection of HIV-1 in China

Background and Objectives: Six HIV-1 viral load assays have been widely used in China. These include the Cobas Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor Version 1.5 ('Amplicor'), Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1 test Version 1.0 ('CAP/CTM'), Versant HIV-1 RNA Version 3.0 (branched DNA [bDNA]-based assay; 'Versant bDNA'), Abbott RealTime HIV-1 assay ('Abbott RealTime'), NucliSens HIV-1 QT (nucleic acid sequence-based amplification assay; 'NucliSens NASBA'), and NucliSens EasyQ HIV-1 Version 1.1 ('EasyQ V1.1'). Recently, an updated version of EasyQ V1.1, NucliSens EasyQ HIV-1 Version 2.0 ('EasyQ V2.0') was introduced into China. It is important to evaluate the impact of HIV-1 genotypes on the updated assay compared with the other commercial available assays in China. Methods: A total of 175 plasma samples with different HIV-1 clades prevalent in China were collected from treatment-naive patients. The viral loads of those samples were determined with the seven HIV-1 viral load assays, and the quantitative differences between them were evaluated. Results: Overall, EasyQ V2.0 exhibited a significant correlation (R = 0.769-0.850, p <= 0.001) and high agreement (94.77-97.13%, using the Bland-Altman model) with the other six assays. Although no significant differences between EasyQ V2.0 and the other six assays were observed when quantifying clade B' samples, there were statistically significant differences between EasyQ V2.0 and the Amplicor, Versant bDNA, and Abbott RealTime assays when quantifying clade BC samples, and between EasyQ V2.0 and the Versant bDNA and Abbott RealTime assays when quantifying clade AE samples. For clade BC samples, the quantitative differences between EasyQ V2.0 and the Amplicor, Versant bDNA, and Abbott RealTime assays exceeded 0.5 log(10) IU/mL in approximately 50% of samples and exceeded 1 log(10) IU/mL in approximately 15% of samples. For clade AE samples, the quantitative differences between EasyQ V2.0 and the CAP/CTM, Versant bDNA, and Abbott RealTime assays exceeded 0.5 log(10) IU/mL in approximately 50% of samples, and the differences between EasyQ V2.0 and CAP/CTM exceeded 1 log(10), IU/mL in approximately 15% of samples. Conclusion: Genotypes may affect the quantification of HIV-1 RNA, especially in clade BC samples whit respect to EasyQ V2.0 and the Amplicor, Versant bDNA, or Abbott RealTime assays, and in clade AE samples with respect to EasyQ V2.0 and the Versant bDNA or Abbott RealTime assays. It is therefore strongly suggested that, where possible, the HIV-1 viral load in infected patients be quantified at follow-up by the same version of the same assay that was used initially.