E Kainne Dokubo1, Jennifer Evans2, Valerie Winkelman3, Sherri Cyrus3, Leslie H Tobler4, Alice Asher2, Alya Briceno2, Kimberly Page2. 1. University of California San Francisco, 50 Beale Street, Suite 1200, San Francisco, CA 94105, USA. Electronic address: vic8@cdc.gov. 2. University of California San Francisco, 50 Beale Street, Suite 1200, San Francisco, CA 94105, USA. 3. Creative Testing Solutions, 2424 West Erie Drive, Tempe, AZ 85282, USA. 4. Blood Systems Research Institute, 270 Masonic Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94118, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current diagnostic tests for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) involve phlebotomy and serologic testing for HCV antibodies (anti-HCV) and RNA, which are not always feasible. Dried blood spots (DBS) present a minimally invasive sampling method and are suitable for sample collection, storage and testing. OBJECTIVES: To assess the utility of DBS in HCV detection, we evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of DBS for anti-HCV and HCV RNA detection compared to plasma specimens. STUDY DESIGN: This cross-sectional validation study was conducted in the context of an existing prospective study of HCV in young injection drug users. Blood samples were collected by venipuncture into serum separator tubes (SST) and via finger stick onto Whatman 903(®) protein-saver cards. Plasma samples and eluates from the DBS were tested for anti-HCV using either a third generation enzyme-linked or chemiluminescent immunoassay (IA), and HCV RNA using discriminatory HCV transcription-mediated amplification assay (dHCV TMA). DBS results were compared to their corresponding plasma sample results. RESULTS: 148 participants were tested for anti-HCV and 132 participants were tested for HCV RNA. For anti-HCV, the sensitivity of DBS was 70%, specificity was 100%, positive predictive value (PPV) was 100%, negative predictive value (NPV) was 76% and Kappa was 0.69. For HCV RNA, the sensitivity of DBS was 90%, specificity was 100%, PPV was 100%, NPV was 94% and Kappa was 0.92. CONCLUSIONS: DBS are sensitive and very specific in detecting anti-HCV and HCV RNA, demonstrate good correlation with plasma results, and have potential to facilitate diagnosis of HCV infection.
BACKGROUND: Current diagnostic tests for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) involve phlebotomy and serologic testing for HCV antibodies (anti-HCV) and RNA, which are not always feasible. Dried blood spots (DBS) present a minimally invasive sampling method and are suitable for sample collection, storage and testing. OBJECTIVES: To assess the utility of DBS in HCV detection, we evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of DBS for anti-HCV and HCV RNA detection compared to plasma specimens. STUDY DESIGN: This cross-sectional validation study was conducted in the context of an existing prospective study of HCV in young injection drug users. Blood samples were collected by venipuncture into serum separator tubes (SST) and via finger stick onto Whatman 903(®) protein-saver cards. Plasma samples and eluates from the DBS were tested for anti-HCV using either a third generation enzyme-linked or chemiluminescent immunoassay (IA), and HCV RNA using discriminatory HCV transcription-mediated amplification assay (dHCV TMA). DBS results were compared to their corresponding plasma sample results. RESULTS: 148 participants were tested for anti-HCV and 132 participants were tested for HCV RNA. For anti-HCV, the sensitivity of DBS was 70%, specificity was 100%, positive predictive value (PPV) was 100%, negative predictive value (NPV) was 76% and Kappa was 0.69. For HCV RNA, the sensitivity of DBS was 90%, specificity was 100%, PPV was 100%, NPV was 94% and Kappa was 0.92. CONCLUSIONS:DBS are sensitive and very specific in detecting anti-HCV and HCV RNA, demonstrate good correlation with plasma results, and have potential to facilitate diagnosis of HCV infection.
Authors: Sylvie Jonckheere; Anne Vincent; Leila Belkhir; Dunja Wilmes; Bernard Vandercam; Jean Cyr Yombi Journal: AIDS Patient Care STDS Date: 2013-05-19 Impact factor: 5.078
Authors: Gregory L Armstrong; Annemarie Wasley; Edgar P Simard; Geraldine M McQuillan; Wendi L Kuhnert; Miriam J Alter Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2006-05-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Sanaa M Kamal; Amr E Fouly; Refaat R Kamel; Bridgette Hockenjos; Ahmed Al Tawil; Khalifa E Khalifa; Qi He; Margaret J Koziel; Khairy M El Naggar; Jens Rasenack; Nezam H Afdhal Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Angel M Mayor; Maria A Gomez; Diana M Fernandez; Eddy Rios-Olivares; James C Thomas; Robert F Hunter Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Cari L Miller; Caitlin Johnston; Patricia M Spittal; Kathy Li; Nancy Laliberté; Julio S G Montaner; Martin T Schechter Journal: Hepatology Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Cristina Caroça; Vera Vicente; Paula Campelo; Maria Chasqueira; Helena Caria; Susana Silva; Paulo Paixão; João Paço Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Xu Su; Bradley F Carlson; Xiexiu Wang; Xiaoyan Li; Ying Zhang; JoLynn P Montgomery; Yaxing Ding; Abram L Wagner; Brenda Gillespie; Matthew L Boulton Journal: J Infect Public Health Date: 2017-09-28 Impact factor: 3.718
Authors: Fahimah Amini; Erick Auma; Yingfen Hsia; Sam Bilton; Tom Hall; Laxmee Ramkhelawon; Paul T Heath; Kirsty Le Doare Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-03-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Benjamin Hayes; Alya Briceno; Alice Asher; Michelle Yu; Jennifer L Evans; Judith A Hahn; Kimberly Page Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2014-06-25 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Sonia Vázquez-Morón; Pablo Ryan; Beatriz Ardizone-Jiménez; Dolores Martín; Jesus Troya; Guillermo Cuevas; Jorge Valencia; María A Jimenez-Sousa; Ana Avellón; Salvador Resino Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-01-30 Impact factor: 4.379