Holguín Africa, López Marisa, Molinero Mar, Soriano Vincent
Department of Infectious Diseases, Hospital Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.
J Clin Microbiol. 2008 Sep;46(9):2918-23. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02414-07. Epub 2008 Jul 2.
Monitoring antiretroviral therapy requires that human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) viremia assays are applicable to all distinct variants. This study evaluates the performance of three commercial viral load assays-Versant HIV-1 RNA bDNA v3.0, Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1, and NucliSens HIV-1 EasyQ v1.2-in testing 83 plasma specimens from patients carrying HIV-1 non-B subtypes and recombinants previously defined by phylogenetic analysis of the pol gene. All 28 specimens from patients under treatment presented viremia values below the detection limit with the three methods. In the remaining 55 specimens from naive individuals viremia could not be detected in 32.7, 20, and 14.6% using the NucliSens, Versant, or TaqMan tests, respectively, suggesting potential viral load underestimation of some samples by all techniques. Only 32 (58.2%) samples from naive subjects were quantified by the three methods; the NucliSens test provided the highest HIV RNA values (mean, 4.87 log copies/ml), and the Versant test provided the lowest (mean, 4.16 log copies/ml). Viremia differences of greater than 1 log were seen in 8 (14.5%) of 55 specimens, occurring in 10.9, 7.3, and 5.4%, respectively, of the specimens in comparisons of Versant versus NucliSens, Versant versus TaqMan, and TaqMan versus NucliSens. Differences greater than 0.5 log, considered significant for clinicians, occurred in 45.5, 27.3, and 29% when the same assays were compared. Some HIV-1 strains, such as subtype G and CRF02_AG, showed more discrepancies in distinct quantification methods than others. In summary, an adequate design of primers and probes is needed for optimal quantitation of plasma HIV-RNA in non-B subtypes. Our data emphasize the need to use the same method for monitoring patients on therapy and also the convenience of HIV-1 subtyping.
监测抗逆转录病毒疗法要求1型人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV-1)病毒血症检测方法适用于所有不同的变异体。本研究评估了三种商业病毒载量检测方法——Versant HIV-1 RNA bDNA v3.0、Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1和NucliSens HIV-1 EasyQ v1.2——对83份来自携带HIV-1非B亚型和重组体患者的血浆标本的检测性能,这些标本先前通过pol基因的系统发育分析确定。所有28份来自接受治疗患者的标本,这三种方法检测到的病毒血症值均低于检测限。在其余55份来自未接受治疗个体的标本中,使用NucliSens、Versant或TaqMan检测方法分别有32.7%、20%和14.6%未检测到病毒血症,这表明所有技术都可能低估了某些样本的病毒载量。只有32份(58.2%)来自未接受治疗受试者的样本通过这三种方法进行了定量;NucliSens检测方法提供的HIV RNA值最高(平均4.87 log拷贝/毫升),Versant检测方法提供的最低(平均4.16 log拷贝/毫升)。在55份标本中有8份(14.5%)的病毒血症差异大于1 log,在Versant与NucliSens、Versant与TaqMan以及TaqMan与NucliSens的比较中,分别占标本的10.9%、7.3%和5.4%。对于临床医生而言,差异大于0.5 log被认为具有显著意义,在相同检测方法比较时,分别有45.5%、27.3%和29%出现这种情况。一些HIV-1毒株,如G亚型和CRF02_AG,在不同定量方法中显示出比其他毒株更多的差异。总之,需要对引物和探针进行适当设计,以实现对非B亚型血浆HIV-RNA的最佳定量。我们的数据强调了在监测接受治疗的患者时使用相同方法的必要性,以及HIV-1亚型分型的便利性。