Cargando…

Evaluation of a Multiplex Assay for Estimation of HIV-1 Incidence

OBJECTIVES: Accurate methods of estimating HIV-1 incidence are critical for monitoring the status of the epidemic and the impact of prevention strategies. Although several laboratory-based tests have been developed strictly for this purpose, several limitations exist and improved methods or technolo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Curtis, Kelly A., Hanson, Debra L., Kennedy, M. Susan, Owen, S. Michele
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3661489/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23717568
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0064201
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: Accurate methods of estimating HIV-1 incidence are critical for monitoring the status of the epidemic and the impact of prevention strategies. Although several laboratory-based tests have been developed strictly for this purpose, several limitations exist and improved methods or technologies are needed. We sought to further optimize a previously described bead-based, HIV-1-specific multiplex assay with the capability of measuring multiple immune responses for determining recent infection. METHODS: We refined the customized HIV-1 Bio-Plex assay by determining cutoffs and mean durations of recency (MDR), based on the reactivity to longitudinal seroconversion specimens (n = 1347) from 311 ART-naïve, HIV-1-infected subjects. False-recent rates (FRRs) were calculated for various long-term cohorts, including AIDS patients, individuals on ART, and subtype C specimens. Incidence was estimated for each individual assay analyte from a simulated population with a known incidence of 1%. For improved incidence estimates, multi-analyte algorithms based on combinations of 3 to 6 analytes were evaluated and compared to the performance of each individual analyte. RESULTS: The MDR for the six analytes varied from 164.2 to 279.4 days, while the multi-analyte algorithm MDRs were less variable with a minimum and maximum value of 228.4 and 277.9 days, respectively. The FRRs for the 7 multi-analyte algorithms evaluated in this study varied from 0.3% to 3.1%, in a population of ART-naïve, long-term individuals. All algorithms yielded improved incidence estimates as compared to the individual analytes, predicting an incidence of 0.95% to 1.02%. CONCLUSIONS: The HIV-specific multiplex assay described here measures several distinct immune responses in a single assay, allowing for the consideration of multi-analyte algorithms for improved HIV incidence estimates.