Comparison of 3 Tests for Plasma HIV-1 RNA Quantitation of Non-B Subtypes in Patients Infected with HIV-1 in N’Djamena-Chad: Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1 Test Version 2.0, Abbott m2000 RealTime and Generic HIV Viral Load® Assays

C. Adawaye, E. Kamangu, J. Fokam, F. Susin, A. Moussa, Tchombou Hig-Zounet Bertin, Joseph Mad-Toingue, D. Vaira, M. Moutschen
{"title":"Comparison of 3 Tests for Plasma HIV-1 RNA Quantitation of Non-B Subtypes in Patients Infected with HIV-1 in N’Djamena-Chad: Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1 Test Version 2.0, Abbott m2000 RealTime and Generic HIV Viral Load® Assays","authors":"C. Adawaye, E. Kamangu, J. Fokam, F. Susin, A. Moussa, Tchombou Hig-Zounet Bertin, Joseph Mad-Toingue, D. Vaira, M. Moutschen","doi":"10.4172/2332-0877.1000382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Antiretroviral therapy is effective only when it maintains the plasma viral load at an undetectable level or below 50 copies of RNA/ml. Viral Load (VL) is a marker of therapeutic follow-up, particularly within the combination protocols of antivirals. Given the genetic diversity of HIV-1, in Resource-Limited Countries (RLCs), dubious conditions for collecting, conserving and analyzing samples, the choice of one technique over another implies its evaluation on all levels and in particular the cost/benefit ratio. Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of 3 techniques for the measurement of VL for HIV-1 non-B subtypes. The 3 techniques used were: Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan (CAP/CTM) V2.0, Abbott Real-Time and Generic HIV Viral Load®. Methods: Sample collection was done at the National General Reference Hospital (NGRH) between June and October 2013. A total of 116 samples were collected from People Living with HIV (PLHIV) and under treatment for at least 6 months. Measurements of VL were done at the AIDS Reference Laboratory at the University Hospital of Liège with the 3 techniques mentioned above. Results: After amplification by the different techniques, 116 samples were compared with Cobas and Abbott and 42 samples were compared with all 3 techniques. This is due to the lack of plasma for some patients for the Generic HIV Viral Load®. A good correlation is obtained between CAP/CTM and Abbott with R2=0.96016 (p<0.05), while between Abbott vs Generic HIV Viral Load® on one hand and CAP/CTM vs Generic HIV Viral Load® on the other, Pearson correlations (R2) were good and were respectively 0.81064 and 0.72603. This difference with the Generic HIV Viral Load® assay is due to the fact that the plasma has been thawed more than twice. This confirms the fact that plasma freezing, and thawing has more than twice interferes with viral load. Conclusions: Abbott Real time remains the recommended technique for resource-poor countries, particularly Chad, because of its sensitivity and variability in detecting different subtypes of HIV-1.","PeriodicalId":73792,"journal":{"name":"Journal of infectious disease and therapy","volume":"06 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4172/2332-0877.1000382","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of infectious disease and therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2332-0877.1000382","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Antiretroviral therapy is effective only when it maintains the plasma viral load at an undetectable level or below 50 copies of RNA/ml. Viral Load (VL) is a marker of therapeutic follow-up, particularly within the combination protocols of antivirals. Given the genetic diversity of HIV-1, in Resource-Limited Countries (RLCs), dubious conditions for collecting, conserving and analyzing samples, the choice of one technique over another implies its evaluation on all levels and in particular the cost/benefit ratio. Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of 3 techniques for the measurement of VL for HIV-1 non-B subtypes. The 3 techniques used were: Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan (CAP/CTM) V2.0, Abbott Real-Time and Generic HIV Viral Load®. Methods: Sample collection was done at the National General Reference Hospital (NGRH) between June and October 2013. A total of 116 samples were collected from People Living with HIV (PLHIV) and under treatment for at least 6 months. Measurements of VL were done at the AIDS Reference Laboratory at the University Hospital of Liège with the 3 techniques mentioned above. Results: After amplification by the different techniques, 116 samples were compared with Cobas and Abbott and 42 samples were compared with all 3 techniques. This is due to the lack of plasma for some patients for the Generic HIV Viral Load®. A good correlation is obtained between CAP/CTM and Abbott with R2=0.96016 (p<0.05), while between Abbott vs Generic HIV Viral Load® on one hand and CAP/CTM vs Generic HIV Viral Load® on the other, Pearson correlations (R2) were good and were respectively 0.81064 and 0.72603. This difference with the Generic HIV Viral Load® assay is due to the fact that the plasma has been thawed more than twice. This confirms the fact that plasma freezing, and thawing has more than twice interferes with viral load. Conclusions: Abbott Real time remains the recommended technique for resource-poor countries, particularly Chad, because of its sensitivity and variability in detecting different subtypes of HIV-1.
恩贾梅纳-乍得HIV-1感染患者血浆非b亚型HIV-1 RNA定量检测方法的比较:Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1 Test Version 2.0、Abbott m2000 RealTime和Generic HIV病毒载量检测
导读:抗逆转录病毒治疗只有在将血浆病毒载量维持在检测不到的水平或低于50拷贝RNA/ml时才有效。病毒载量(VL)是治疗随访的标志,特别是在抗病毒药物联合方案中。鉴于HIV-1的遗传多样性,在资源有限的国家(rlc),收集、保存和分析样本的条件可疑,选择一种技术而不是另一种技术意味着在所有层面上进行评估,特别是成本/效益比。目的:本研究的目的是比较3种技术测量HIV-1非b亚型的VL的效果。使用的3种技术是:Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan (CAP/CTM) V2.0, Abbott Real-Time和Generic HIV Viral Load®。方法:2013年6 - 10月在国家综合参考医院(NGRH)采集样本。总共从接受治疗至少6个月的艾滋病毒感染者(PLHIV)中收集了116个样本。VL的测量是在利维奇大学医院艾滋病参考实验室用上述3种技术完成的。结果:经不同技术扩增后,116份样品与Cobas和Abbott进行比较,42份样品与3种技术进行比较。这是由于缺乏血浆的一些患者为通用HIV病毒载量®。CAP/CTM与雅培具有较好的相关性,R2=0.96016 (p<0.05),而雅培与Generic HIV Viral Load®、CAP/CTM与Generic HIV Viral Load®的Pearson相关性(R2)较好,分别为0.81064和0.72603。与Generic HIV Viral Load®检测的差异是由于血浆已经解冻两次以上。这证实了血浆冷冻和解冻对病毒载量的干扰超过两倍的事实。结论:雅培实时仍然是资源贫乏国家,特别是乍得的推荐技术,因为它在检测不同亚型HIV-1的敏感性和可变性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信