BACKGROUND: Phylogenetic analysis - the study of the genetic relatedness between HIV strains - has recently been used in criminal prosecutions as evidence of responsibility for HIV transmission. In these trials, the expert opinion of virologists has been of critical importance. PITFALLS: Phylogenetic analysis of HIV gene sequences is complex and its findings do not achieve the levels of certainty obtained with the forensic analysis of human DNA. Although two individuals may carry HIV strains that are closely related, these will not necessarily be unique to the two parties and could extend to other persons within the same transmission network. ACCEPTABLE STANDARDS: For forensic purposes, phylogenetic analysis should be conducted under strictly controlled conditions by laboratories with relevant expertise applying rigorous methods. It is vitally important to include the right controls, which should be epidemiologically and temporally relevant to the parties under investigation. Use of inappropriate controls can exaggerate any relatedness between the virus strains of the complainant and defendant as being strikingly unique. It will be often difficult to obtain the relevant controls. If convenient but less appropriate controls are used, interpretation of the findings should be tempered accordingly. CONCLUSIONS: Phylogenetic analysis cannot prove that HIV transmission occurred directly between two individuals. However, it can exonerate individuals by demonstrating that the defendant carries a virus strain unrelated to that of the complainant. Expert witnesses should acknowledge the limitations of the inferences that might be made and choose the correct language in both written and verbal testimony.
BACKGROUND: Phylogenetic analysis - the study of the genetic relatedness between HIV strains - has recently been used in criminal prosecutions as evidence of responsibility for HIV transmission. In these trials, the expert opinion of virologists has been of critical importance. PITFALLS: Phylogenetic analysis of HIV gene sequences is complex and its findings do not achieve the levels of certainty obtained with the forensic analysis of human DNA. Although two individuals may carry HIV strains that are closely related, these will not necessarily be unique to the two parties and could extend to other persons within the same transmission network. ACCEPTABLE STANDARDS: For forensic purposes, phylogenetic analysis should be conducted under strictly controlled conditions by laboratories with relevant expertise applying rigorous methods. It is vitally important to include the right controls, which should be epidemiologically and temporally relevant to the parties under investigation. Use of inappropriate controls can exaggerate any relatedness between the virus strains of the complainant and defendant as being strikingly unique. It will be often difficult to obtain the relevant controls. If convenient but less appropriate controls are used, interpretation of the findings should be tempered accordingly. CONCLUSIONS: Phylogenetic analysis cannot prove that HIV transmission occurred directly between two individuals. However, it can exonerate individuals by demonstrating that the defendant carries a virus strain unrelated to that of the complainant. Expert witnesses should acknowledge the limitations of the inferences that might be made and choose the correct language in both written and verbal testimony.
Authors: Zita Lazzarini; Carol L Galletly; Eric Mykhalovskiy; Dini Harsono; Elaine O'Keefe; Merrill Singer; Robert J Levine Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-06-13 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Art F Y Poon; Jeffrey B Joy; Conan K Woods; Susan Shurgold; Guillaume Colley; Chanson J Brumme; Robert S Hogg; Julio S G Montaner; P Richard Harrigan Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2014-10-13 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Rebecca Rose; Matthew Hall; Andrew D Redd; Susanna Lamers; Andrew E Barbier; Stephen F Porcella; Sarah E Hudelson; Estelle Piwowar-Manning; Marybeth McCauley; Theresa Gamble; Ethan A Wilson; Johnstone Kumwenda; Mina C Hosseinipour; James G Hakim; Nagalingeswaran Kumarasamy; Suwat Chariyalertsak; Jose H Pilotto; Beatriz Grinsztejn; Lisa A Mills; Joseph Makhema; Breno R Santos; Ying Q Chen; Thomas C Quinn; Christophe Fraser; Myron S Cohen; Susan H Eshleman; Oliver Laeyendecker Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2019-09-26 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Ellsworth M Campbell; Hongwei Jia; Anupama Shankar; Debra Hanson; Wei Luo; Silvina Masciotra; S Michele Owen; Alexandra M Oster; Romeo R Galang; Michael W Spiller; Sara J Blosser; Erika Chapman; Jeremy C Roseberry; Jessica Gentry; Pamela Pontones; Joan Duwve; Paula Peyrani; Ron M Kagan; Jeannette M Whitcomb; Philip J Peters; Walid Heneine; John T Brooks; William M Switzer Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Cordelia E M Coltart; Anne Hoppe; Michael Parker; Liza Dawson; Joseph J Amon; Musonda Simwinga; Gail Geller; Gail Henderson; Oliver Laeyendecker; Joseph D Tucker; Patrick Eba; Vladimir Novitsky; Anne-Mieke Vandamme; Janet Seeley; Gina Dallabetta; Guy Harling; M Kate Grabowski; Peter Godfrey-Faussett; Christophe Fraser; Myron S Cohen; Deenan Pillay Journal: Lancet HIV Date: 2018-08-30 Impact factor: 12.767