» Articles » PMID: 26292298

Evaluation of the RealTime HIV-1, Xpert HIV-1, and Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx Assays in Comparison to the NucliSens EasyQ HIV-1 V2.0 Assay for Quantification of HIV-1 Viral Load

Overview
Specialty Microbiology
Date 2015 Aug 21
PMID 26292298
Citations 28
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

HIV-1 RNA monitoring, both before and during antiretroviral therapy, is an integral part of HIV management worldwide. Measurements of HIV-1 viral loads are expected to assess the copy numbers of all common HIV-1 subtypes accurately and to be equally sensitive at different viral loads. In this study, we compared for the first time the performance of the NucliSens v2.0, RealTime HIV-1, Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx, and Xpert HIV-1 viral load assays. Plasma samples (n = 404) were selected on the basis of their NucliSens v2.0 viral load results and HIV-1 subtypes. Concordance, linear regression, and Bland-Altman plots were assessed, and mixed-model analysis was utilized to compare the analytical performance of the assays for different HIV-1 subtypes and for low and high HIV-1 copy numbers. Overall, high concordance (>83.89%), high correlation values (Pearson r values of >0.89), and good agreement were observed among all assays, although the Xpert and Aptima assays, which provided the most similar outputs (estimated mean viral loads of 2.67 log copies/ml [95% confidence interval [CI], 2.50 to 2.84 log copies/ml] and 2.68 log copies/ml [95% CI, 2.49 to 2.86 log copies/ml], respectively), correlated best with the RealTime assay (89.8% concordance, with Pearson r values of 0.97 to 0.98). These three assays exhibited greater precision than the NucliSens v2.0 assay. All assays were equally sensitive for subtype B and AG/G samples and for samples with viral loads of 1.60 to 3.00 log copies/ml. The NucliSens v2.0 assay underestimated A1 samples and those with viral loads of >3.00 log copies/ml. The RealTime assay tended to underquantify subtype C (compared to the Xpert and Aptima assays) and subtype A1 samples. The Xpert and Aptima assays were equally efficient for detection of all subtypes and viral loads, which renders these new assays most suitable for clinical HIV laboratories.

Citing Articles

Determinants of Direct Costs of HIV-1 Outpatient Care in Israel.

Rom T, Levy I, Perlman S, Ziv-Baran T, Mor O Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(21).

PMID: 36361428 PMC: 9655323. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192114542.


Comparison of the performance of Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx Assay with Abbott RealTime HIV Assay for viral load monitoring using plasma and Dried Blood Spots collected in Kenya.

Mwau M, Schaffer S, Kimani H, Kasiano P, Ogolla F, Ajema E PLoS One. 2022; 17(8):e0269838.

PMID: 35994447 PMC: 9394820. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269838.


Point-of-care viral load tests to detect high HIV viral load in people living with HIV/AIDS attending health facilities.

Ochodo E, Olwanda E, Deeks J, Mallett S Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022; 3:CD013208.

PMID: 35266555 PMC: 8908762. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013208.pub2.


Performance Comparison of Xpert HIV-1 Viral Load Assay and Roche Taqman and Abbott M2000 RT in Bamako, Mali.

Kone B, Goita D, Dolo O, Traore D, Sogoba D, Somboro A J AIDS Clin Res. 2021; 11(7).

PMID: 34295571 PMC: 8294115.


Prospective evaluation of accuracy of HIV viral load monitoring using the Aptima HIV Quant Dx assay with fingerstick and venous dried blood spots prepared under field conditions in Kenya.

Mwau M, Danda J, Mbugua J, Handa A, Fortunko J, Worlock A PLoS One. 2021; 16(4):e0249376.

PMID: 33798221 PMC: 8018649. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249376.


References
1.
Sollis K, Smit P, Fiscus S, Ford N, Vitoria M, Essajee S . Systematic review of the performance of HIV viral load technologies on plasma samples. PLoS One. 2014; 9(2):e85869. PMC: 3928047. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0085869. View

2.
Xu S, Song A, Nie J, Li X, Meng S, Zhang C . Comparison between the automated Roche Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1 test version 2.0 assay and its version 1 and Nuclisens HIV-1 EasyQ version 2.0 assays when measuring diverse HIV-1 genotypes in China. J Clin Virol. 2011; 53(1):33-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2011.10.001. View

3.
Muenchhoff M, Madurai S, Hempenstall A, Adland E, Carlqvist A, Moonsamy A . Evaluation of the NucliSens EasyQ v2.0 assay in comparison with the Roche Amplicor v1.5 and the Roche CAP/CTM HIV-1 Test v2.0 in quantification of C-clade HIV-1 in plasma. PLoS One. 2014; 9(8):e103983. PMC: 4144839. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103983. View

4.
Ndiaye O, Diop-Ndiaye H, Ouedraogo A, Fall-Malick F, Sow-Sall A, Thiam M . Comparison of four commercial viral load techniques in an area of non-B HIV-1 subtypes circulation. J Virol Methods. 2015; 222:122-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2015.06.002. View

5.
Gomes P, Carvalho A, Diogo I, Goncalves F, Costa I, Cabanas J . Comparison of the NucliSENS EasyQ HIV-1 v2.0 with Abbott m2000rt RealTime HIV-1 assay for plasma RNA quantitation in different HIV-1 subtypes. J Virol Methods. 2013; 193(1):18-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2013.05.001. View