Chew C B, Herring B L, Zheng F, Browne C, Saksena N K, Cunningham A L, Dwyer D E
Department of Virology, CIDMLS, ICPMR, and Centre for Virus Research, Westmead Millenium Institute, Westmead Hospital, NSW, Australia.
J Clin Virol. 1999 Oct;14(2):87-94. doi: 10.1016/s1386-6532(99)00053-0.
Commercial human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) ribonucleic acid (RNA) quantification assays vary in their ability to quantify different subtypes of HIV-1, a problem in regions where multipte HIV-1 subtypes may be circulating.
To assess commercial HIV-1 RNA quantification assays on two plasma panels. Panel 1 consisted of HIV-1 seronegative plasma 'spiked' with a known amount of cultured virus of different subtypes, and Panel 2 comprised plasma collected from individuals infected with different HIV-1 subtypes.
The comparison involved the Amplicor HIV-1 reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), Quantiplex branched DNA, and NucliSens HIV-1 QT assays. Panel 1 consisted of 11 plasma 'spiked' with cultured viruses of HIV-1 subtypes A-F, and Panel 2 included 33 plasma samples from 16 patients infected with subtypes A, B, C, E and G.
In Panel 1, the Quantiplex branched deoxyribonucleic acid (bDNA) assay quantified subtypes A-F efficiently, comparable to published results from two other laboratories. The Amplicor RT-PCR assay quantified subtypes B, C, and D but was relatively less efficient with subtypes E, F, and did not or poorly quantified subtype A. Testing of Panel 2 showed some inter-assay differences. In contrast to Panel 1, the Amplicor RT-PCR assay performed variably with subtype A when compared with the Quantiplex bDNA and NucliSens QT assays, and higher viral load levels were generated with subtype E using the Amplicor RT-PCR assay. Subtypes B and C showed some inter-patient differences but the Quantiplex bDNA generally gave a lower quantification than the Amplicor RT-PCR and NucliSens QT assays.
These studies confirm that commercial HIV-1 load assays vary in their ability to quantify different HIV-1 subtypes. This may be more apparent with individual patient samples than with 'spiked' panels. This variability emphasizes that it is preferable for patient samples to be tested with the same assay, and care should be taken where infection with unusual subtypes is suspected.
商用人类免疫缺陷病毒1型（HIV-1）核糖核酸（RNA）定量检测方法在定量不同HIV-1亚型的能力上存在差异，这在多种HIV-1亚型可能同时传播的地区是个问题。
在两个血浆样本组上评估商用HIV-1 RNA定量检测方法。样本组1由添加了已知量不同亚型培养病毒的HIV-1血清阴性血浆组成，样本组2由感染了不同HIV-1亚型的个体采集的血浆组成。
比较涉及Amplicor HIV-1逆转录酶-聚合酶链反应（RT-PCR）、Quantiplex分支DNA和NucliSens HIV-1 QT检测方法。样本组1由11份添加了HIV-1 A-F亚型培养病毒的血浆组成，样本组2包括来自16名感染A、B、C、E和G亚型患者的33份血浆样本。
在样本组1中，Quantiplex分支脱氧核糖核酸（bDNA）检测方法能有效定量A-F亚型，与其他两个实验室公布的结果相当。Amplicor RT-PCR检测方法能定量B、C和D亚型，但对E、F亚型的定量效率相对较低，对A亚型则无法定量或定量效果很差。对样本组2的检测显示出一些检测方法之间的差异。与样本组1不同，与Quantiplex bDNA和NucliSens QT检测方法相比，Amplicor RT-PCR检测方法对A亚型的检测结果不稳定，并且使用Amplicor RT-PCR检测方法对E亚型检测出的病毒载量水平更高。B和C亚型显示出一些患者间差异，但Quantiplex bDNA通常比Amplicor RT-PCR和NucliSens QT检测方法给出的定量结果更低。
这些研究证实，商用HIV-1载量检测方法在定量不同HIV-1亚型的能力上存在差异。这种差异在个体患者样本中可能比在添加病毒的样本组中更明显。这种变异性强调，患者样本最好用同一种检测方法进行检测，并在怀疑感染不常见亚型时应格外小心。
