4.5 Article

HIV-1 low-level viraemia assessed with 3 commercial real-time PCR assays show high variability

期刊

BMC INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2334-12-100

关键词

Residual viraemia; HIV-1 RNA; Viral load; Assay variability; Blip

资金

  1. Abbott
  2. Roche

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Current real-time PCR-based HIV-1 viral load (VL) assays allow the detection of residual viraemia in antiretroviral-treated patients. The clinical outcome of HIV-1 patients experiencing low-level replication (<50 cop/mL) in comparison with fully suppressed patients is currently debated. We analysed variability of 3 VL assays <50 cop/mL, and evaluated the reproducibility of viral blips <100 cop/mL. Methods: Three commercial VL assays were tested: Versant HIV-1 RNA 1.0 kPCR (Siemens), Abbott Realtime HIV-1, and Cobas Ampliprep/Cobas Taqman HIV-1 v2.0 (Roche). Ten replicates of a reference sample at 4 low target dilutions were tested to evaluate assay variability. Prospective collection of 181 clinical samples with detectable VL <50 cop/mL was used to evaluate intra-and inter-assay variability by triplicate testing. Samples from 26 patients experiencing a viral blip were retested. Results: All assays showed substantial variability at low VL level: the coefficient of variation at 100, 50, 25 and 12 cop/mL ranged respectively from 32 to 44%, 35 to 68%, 41 to 83% and 33 to 77%. In the intra-assay evaluation of repeatability, 52.5 to 57.5% of detectable VL <50 cop/mL tested in triplicate showed at least one fully undetected result. Variability was similar in the inter-assay arm. The VL blips could only be reproduced in 19% of cases. Conclusions: The most recent versions of widespread commercial VL assays showed substantial variability at low levels and residual viraemia could not be consistently reproduced. Patient outcome studies comparing residual VL to full suppression are therefore biased when using commercial assays.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据