AIDS Reference Laboratory of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Subunit UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium.
J Clin Microbiol. 2010 Apr;48(4):1337-42. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01226-09. Epub 2010 Feb 17.
Initial evaluations of the Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) test (CAP/CTM) demonstrated good performance but, afterwards, reports about underquantification were published. We investigated whether the problem was solved with a second version of this assay, the Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1 test, version 2.0 (CAP/CTM v2.0). The remaining plasma of 375 consecutive HIV-1 positive samples with a viral load of >or=4,000 copies/ml was collected in three laboratories. The samples were diluted and retested with our routine method Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas Amplicor HIV-1 monitor test v1.5 in ultrasensitive mode (CAP/CA PHS), as well as with the CAP/CTM and CAP/CTM v2.0 tests. An absolute difference between the results of two methods of >or=0.71 log(10) copies/ml was defined as moderately discrepant, and an absolute difference of >or=0.93 log(10) copies/ml was defined as severely discrepant. In addition, criteria for considering the new methods equivalent to the routine method were formulated. (i) For CAP/CTM compared to CAP/CA PHS, 36 (9.5%) and 20 (5.3%) samples were, respectively, considered moderately and severely underquantified by CAP/CTM. The mean difference between CAP/CTM and CAP/CA PHS was -0.32 log(10) copies/ml. Eight of nineteen of the severely underquantified samples were from patients infected with HIV-1 subtype B strain. (ii) For CAP/CTM v2.0 compared to CAP/CA PHS, no sample was moderately or severely underquantified by CAP/CTM v2.0. A mean difference of 0.08 log(10) copies/ml was found with CAP/CTM v2.0 compared to CAP/CA PHS. The underquantification problem of the CAP/CTM kit was clearly demonstrated. The criteria for the equivalence of CAP/CTM v2.0 to the routine test CAP/CA PHS were fulfilled.
对 Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan 人类免疫缺陷病毒 1 型(HIV-1)检测(CAP/CTM)的初步评估显示其性能良好,但随后发表了一些关于检测结果低估的报告。我们研究了该检测的第二代产品,即 Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1 检测 2.0 版(CAP/CTM v2.0)是否解决了这个问题。从 3 个实验室收集了 375 例连续的 HIV-1 阳性且病毒载量大于等于 4000 拷贝/ml 的血浆剩余样本。这些样本进行了稀释,并用我们常规的 ultrasensitive 模式 Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas Amplicor HIV-1 monitor test v1.5(CAP/CA PHS),以及 CAP/CTM 和 CAP/CTM v2.0 进行了重新检测。两种方法的结果相差大于等于 0.71 log(10) 拷贝/ml 被定义为中度不一致,相差大于等于 0.93 log(10) 拷贝/ml 被定义为严重不一致。此外,还制定了评估新方法与常规方法等效的标准。(i)与 CAP/CA PHS 相比,CAP/CTM 分别有 36 份(9.5%)和 20 份(5.3%)样本被认为是中度和严重低估,CAP/CTM 的平均差异为-0.32 log(10) 拷贝/ml。19 份严重低估的样本中有 8 份来自感染 HIV-1 亚型 B 株的患者。(ii)与 CAP/CA PHS 相比,CAP/CTM v2.0 没有样本被中度或严重低估。与 CAP/CA PHS 相比,CAP/CTM v2.0 的平均差异为 0.08 log(10) 拷贝/ml。这清楚地表明了 CAP/CTM 试剂盒存在低估的问题。CAP/CTM v2.0 与常规检测 CAP/CA PHS 等效的标准得到了满足。