Performance of Bio-Rad HIV-1/2 Confirmatory Assay in HIV-1, HIV-2 and HIV-1/2 dually reactive patients - comparison with INNO-LIA and immunocomb discriminatory assays.

BACKGROUND

Being able to discriminate between HIV-1, HIV-2 and HIV-1/2 dual infection is imperative for the appropriate selection of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in regions with high HIV-2 endemicity.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate Bio-Rad Geenius HIV-1/2 Confirmatory Assay against INNO-LIA HIV 1/2 Score and ImmunoComb HIV 1/2 BiSpot with an emphasis towards ability to discriminate between HIV-1, HIV-2 and HIV-1/2 dual infection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

131 samples from ART naïve HIV infected patients in Guinea-Bissau were selected retrospectively and tested with Geenius, INNO-LIA and Immunocomb. HIV-1/2 RNA were measured in all samples and HIV-1/2 DNA in 59 samples.

RESULTS

The Geenius reader typed 62 samples as HIV-1 reactive, 37 samples as HIV-2 reactive and 32 samples as HIV-1/2 dually reactive. Geenius manual reading classified 10% more samples as HIV-1/2 dually reactive (n = 35). INNO-LIA typed 63 samples as HIV-1 reactive, 36 samples as HIV-2 reactive and 32 samples as HIV-1/2 dually reactive while Immunocomb classified a large proportion of samples as HIV-1/2 dually reactive (n = 45). The measurement of agreement of the Geenius reader compared with INNO-LIA and Immunocomb was 92.4% and 84.0% respectively while the measurement of agreement of Geenius manual reading compared with INNO-LIA and Immuncomb was 93.1% and 89.3% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Geenius has similar performance characteristics as INNO-LIA, and performs considerably better than Immunocomb, for differentiating between HIV types. This is especially true when using the Geenius reader while manual reading of the Geenius assay seemed to overestimate the numbers of HIV-1/2 dually reactive samples.