| Literature DB >> 19226452 |
Eligius F Lyamuya1, Said Aboud, Willy K Urassa, Jaffer Sufi, Judica Mbwana, Faustin Ndugulile, Charles Massambu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Suitable algorithms based on a combination of two or more simple rapid HIV assays have been shown to have a diagnostic accuracy comparable to double enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) or double ELISA with Western Blot strategies. The aims of this study were to evaluate the performance of five simple rapid HIV assays using whole blood samples from HIV-infected patients, pregnant women, voluntary counseling and testing attendees and blood donors, and to formulate an alternative confirmatory strategy based on rapid HIV testing algorithms suitable for use in Tanzania.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19226452 PMCID: PMC2650699 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2334-9-19
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Summary of Sensitivity and Specificity of the Rapid HIV Assays Evaluated
| Assay | Sensitivity (n = 390) | Specificity (n = 1043) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial testing | Repeat testing | Initial testing | Repeat testing | |||||
| Reactive | % (95% CI) | Reactive | % (95% CI) | Non-reactive | % (95% CI) | Non-reactive | % (95% CI) | |
| Determine | 390 | 100 (99.1–100) | - | - | 1039 | 99.6 (99–99.9) | 1041 | 99.8 (99.3–100) |
| SD Bioline | 390 | 100 (99.1–100) | - | - | 1037 | 99.4 (98.8–99.7) | 1041 | 99.8 (99.3–99.9) |
| Uni-Gold™ | 390 | 100 (99.1–100) | - | - | 1043 | 100 (99.6–100) | - | - |
| First Response | 388 | 99.5 (98.2–99.9) | 390 | 100 (99.1–100) | 1039 | 99.6 (99–99.9) | 1040 | 99.7 (99.2–99.9) |
| Stat-Pak Dipstick | 381 | 97.7 (95.7–98.9) | 390 | 100 (99.1–100) | 1041 | 99.8 (99.3–99.9) | 1043 | 100 (99.6–100) |
CI, confidence interval
Performance characteristics of HIV rapid tests according to the samples collected from the sites
| Assay | Site | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PASADA + MHIC | MNH Blood bank | MNH PMTCT | AMREF | |||||
| Sensitivity | Specificity | Sensitivity | Specificity | Sensitivity | Specificity | Sensitivity | Specificity | |
| Determine | 322/322 (100) 98.9–100 | 239/241 (99.2) | 12/12 (100) | 246/247 (99.6) | 19/19 (100) | 82/82 (100) | 37/37 (100) | 472/473 (99.8) |
| SD Bioline | 322/322 (100) | 237/2471 | 12/12 (100) | 245/247 (99.2) | 19/19 (100) | 82/82 | 37/37 (100) | 473/473 (100) |
| Uni-Gold™ | 322/322 (100) 98.9–100 | 241/241 (100) | 12/12 (100) | 247/247 (100) | 19/19 (100) | 82/82 (100) | 37/37 (100) | 473/473 (100) |
| First Response | 321/322 (99.7) | 238/241 (98.8) | 11/12 | 246/247 (99.6) | 19/19 | 82/82 (100) | 37/37 (100) | 473/473 (100) |
| Stat-Pak Dipstick | 316/322 (98.1) | 238/241 (98.8) | 12/12 (100) | 247/247 (100) 98.5–100 | 19/19 (100) | 82/82 (100) | 34/37 (91.9) | 472/473 (98.8) |
Sensitivity (n = 390), specificity (n = 1043) and cost of various combinations of rapid HIV assays
| S/N | 1st Assay | 2nd Assay | Sensitivity % (95% CI) | Specificity % (95% CI) | Cost per algorithm (US$) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | SD Bioline | First Response | 100 (99.1–100) | 99.9** (99.5–99.9) | 0.47 + 0.65 = 1.12 |
| 2 | First Response*** | SD Bioline | 99.5 (98.2–99.9) | 100 (96–99.1) | 0.65 + 0.47 = 1.12 |
| 3 | SD Bioline | Determine | 100 (99.1–100) | 100* (96–99.1) | 0.47 + 0.80 = 1.27 |
| 4 | Determine | SD Bioline | 100 (99.1–100) | 100* (96–99.1) | 0.80 + 0.47 = 1.27 |
| 5 | SD Bioline | Stat-Pak Dipstick | 100 (99.1–100) | 100* (96–99.1) | 0.47 + 0.80 = 1.27 |
| 6 | Stat-Pak Dipstick*** | SD Bioline | 97.9 (96–99.1) | 100 (96–99.1) | 0.80 + 0.47 = 1.27 |
| 7 | Determine | First Response | 100 (99.1–100) | 100* (96–99.1) | 0.80 + 0.65 = 1.45 |
| 8 | First Response*** | Determine | 99.5 (98.2–99.9) | 99.9 (99.5–99.9) | 0.65 + 0.80 = 1.45 |
| 9 | First Response*** | Stat-Pak Dipstick | 99.5 (98.2–99.9) | 100 (96–99.1) | 0.65 + 0.80 = 1.45 |
| 10 | Stat-Pak Dipstick*** | First Response | 97.9 (96–99.1) | 100 (96–99.1) | 0.80 + 0.65 = 1.45 |
| 11 | Determine | Stat-Pak Dipstick | 100 (99.1–100) | 100* (96–99.1) | 0.80 + 0.80 = 1.60 |
| 12 | Stat-Pak Dipstick*** | Determine | 97.9 (96–99.1) | 100 (96–99.1) | 0.80 + 0.80 = 1.60 |
| 13 | SD Bioline | Uni-Gold™ | 100 (99.1–100) | 100* (96–99.1) | 0.47 + 1.80 = 2.27 |
| 14 | Uni-Gold™ | SD Bioline | 100 (99.1–100) | 100* (96–99.1) | 1.80 + 0.47 = 2.27 |
| 15 | Uni-Gold™ | First Response | 100 (99.1–100) | 100* (96–99.1) | 1.80 + 0.65 = 2.45 |
| 16 | First Response*** | Uni-Gold™ | 99.5 (98.2–99.9) | 100 (96–99.1) | 0.65 + 1.80 = 2.45 |
| 17 | Uni-Gold™ | Stat-Pak Dipstick | 100 (99.1–100) | 100* (96–99.1) | 1.80 + 0.80**** = 2.6 |
| 18 | Stat-Pak Dipstick*** | Uni-Gold™ | 97.9 (96–99.1) | 100 (96–99.1) | 0.80 + 1.80 = 2.60 |
| 19 | Determine | Uni-Gold™ | 100 (99.1–100) | 100* (96–99.1) | 0.80 + 1.80 = 2.60 |
| 20 | Uni-Gold™ | Determine | 100 (99.1–100) | 100* (96–99.1) | 1.80 + 0.80 = 2.60 |
*Combination of the two assays had no concordant false positive results.
**One sample was repeatedly concordantly false positive in the two assays.
***The first test had initial suboptimal sensitivity (< 100%).
****Cost of Stat-Pak Dipstick is indicated as a range 0.8–0.95 US$. The best case scenario of the lowest possible cost for this test was assumed in computing the cost for algorithms involving use of Stat-Pak Dipstick.