Search

Background: The Trinity Biotech Uni-Gold HIV test (Uni-Gold) is often used as a supplementary rapid test in testing algorithms., Objective: To evaluate the operational performance of the Uni-Gold as a first-line screening test among gay and bisexual men (GBM) in a setting where 4th generation HIV laboratory assays are routinely used., Study Design: We compared the performance of Uni-Gold with conventional HIV serology conducted in parallel among GBM attending 22 testing sites. Sensitivity was calculated separately for acute and established infection, defined using 4th generation screening Ag/Ab immunoassay (EIA) and Western blot results. Previous HIV testing history and results of supplementary 3rd generation HIV Ab EIA, and p24 antigen EIA were used to further characterise cases of acute infection., Results: Of 10,793 specimens tested with Uni-Gold and conventional serology, 94 (0.90%, 95%CI:0.70-1.07) were confirmed as HIV-positive by conventional serology, and 37 (39.4%) were classified as acute infection. Uni-Gold sensitivity was 81.9% overall (77/94, 95%CI:72.6-89.1); 56.8% for acute infection (21/37, 95%CI:39.5-72.9) and 98.2% for established infection (56/57, 95%CI:90.6-100.0). Of 17 false non-reactive Uni-Gold results, 16 were acute infections, and of these seven were p24 antigen reactive but antibody negative. Uni-Gold specificity was 99.9% (10,692/10,699, 95%CI:99.9-100.0), PPV was 91.7% (95%CI:83.6-96.6) and NPV was 99.8% (95%CI:99.7-99.9), respectively., Conclusions: In this population, Uni-Gold had good specificity and sensitivity was high for established infections when compared to 4th generation laboratory assays, however sensitivity was lower in acute infections. Where rapid tests are used in populations with a high proportion of acute infections, additional testing strategies are needed to detect acute infections., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: The rapid test study was a real-time comparison of point-of-care (POC) HIV tests to determine their abilities to detect early HIV infection., Study Design: Men and transgender persons reporting sex with men in the prior year were recruited at the Public Health-Seattle & King County STD Clinic, Gay City Health Project, and University of Washington Primary Infection Clinic. Study tests included the OraQuick ADVANCE Rapid HIV-1/2 Antibody Test performed on oral fluids and tests performed on fingerstick whole blood specimens including OraQuick, Uni-Gold Recombigen HIV test, Determine HIV-1/2 Ag/Ab Combo, and INSTI HIV-1 Rapid Antibody Test. Specimens from subjects with negative results were sent for EIA and nucleic acid amplification testing. McNemar's exact tests compared the numbers of HIV-infected subjects detected., Results: Between February 2010 and August 2014, there were 3438 study visits. Twenty-four subjects had discordant POC results with at least one reactive and one non-reactive test, including one subject with a reactive Determine p24 antigen. OraQuick performed on oral fluids identified fewer persons compared to all fingerstick tests. OraQuick performed on fingerstick whole blood detected fewer persons compared to the Determine Combo antibody component (p=.008) and Combo overall (p=.004), and there was a trend when compared to INSTI (p=.06). The Determine Combo specificity was 98.99%., Conclusions: As reported by others, Determine Combo underperforms compared to laboratory-based testing, but it did detect one acute infection. If these results are validated, the specificity of Determine Combo may limit its usefulness in populations with lower HIV incidence., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Point-of-care (POC) rapid HIV tests have sensitivity during the "window period" comparable only to earliest generation EIAs. To date, it is unclear whether any POC test performs significantly better than others., Objective: Compare abilities of POC tests to detect early infection in real time., Study Design: Men who have sex with men (MSM) were recruited into a prospective, cross-sectional study at two HIV testing sites and a research clinic. Procedures compared four POC tests: one performed on oral fluids and three on fingerstick whole blood specimens. Specimens from participants with negative POC results were tested by EIA and pooled nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT). McNemar's exact tests compared numbers of HIV-infected participants detected., Results: Between February 2010 and May 2013, 104 men tested HIV-positive during 2479 visits. Eighty-two participants had concordant reactive POC results, 3 participants had concordant non-reactive POC tests but reactive EIAs, and 8 participants had acute infection. Of 12 participants with discordant POC results, OraQuick ADVANCE Rapid HIV-1/2 Antibody Test performed on oral fluids identified fewer infections than OraQuick performed on fingerstick (p = .005), Uni-Gold Recombigen HIV test (p = .01), and determine HIV-1/2 Ag/Ab combo (p = .005)., Conclusions: These data confirm that oral fluid POC testing detects fewer infections than other methods and is best reserved for circumstances precluding fingerstick or venipuncture. Regardless of specimen type, POC tests failed to identify many HIV-infected MSM in Seattle. In populations with high HIV incidence, the currently approved POC antibody tests are inadequate unless supplemented with p24 antigen tests or NAAT., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)