Braun Patrick, Ehret Robert, Wiesmann Frank, Zabbai Frauke, Knickmann Mechthild, Kühn Rainer, Thamm Sven, Warnat Gerald, Knechten Heribert
PZB Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2007;45(1):93-9. doi: 10.1515/CCLM.2007.008.
Quantification of viral load (VL) is standard for monitoring HIV-1 therapy and is crucial before deciding whether to switch or to continue a current antiretroviral regimen.
We compared the performance of the four most widely used commercial viral-load assays, COBAS Amplicor Monitor v1.5, Versant HIV-1 RNA 3.0, Abbott RealTime HIV-1 and Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1 (CAP/CTM), in terms of intra- and inter-assay variability, as well as hands-on-time, specificity and ability to quantify group M subtypes.
Although linearity and correlation were confirmed for the assays and comparable sensitivity and specificity were verified for genetically diverse HIV-1 subtypes, demonstrating suitability for monitoring of HIV group M isolates, the viral loads obtained showed variations, with a mean difference of 0.1-0.4 log, depending on the system used.
Although sensitivity and precision were confirmed for all the systems, differences between them should be taken into account when viral load monitoring of the same person is performed using different systems.
病毒载量(VL)定量是监测HIV-1治疗的标准,并且在决定是否更换或继续当前抗逆转录病毒治疗方案之前至关重要。
我们比较了四种最广泛使用的商业病毒载量检测方法,即COBAS Amplicor Monitor v1.5、Versant HIV-1 RNA 3.0、雅培实时HIV-1和Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1(CAP/CTM)在批内和批间变异性、操作时间、特异性以及定量M组亚型能力方面的表现。
尽管检测方法的线性和相关性得到确认,并且对基因多样化的HIV-1亚型验证了相当的敏感性和特异性,表明适用于监测HIV M组分离株,但所获得的病毒载量存在差异,根据所使用的系统,平均差异为0.1 - 0.4对数。
尽管所有系统的敏感性和精密度均得到确认,但在使用不同系统对同一人进行病毒载量监测时,应考虑它们之间的差异。