Whitby Shamaya, Smith Amanda, Rossetti Rebecca, Chapin-Bardales Johanna, Martin Amy, Wejnert Cyprian, Masciotra Silvina
Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education at the Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd NE MS-A25, Atlanta, GA, 30329, USA.
Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA, 3033, USA.
J Community Health. 2020 Dec;45(6):1228-1235. doi: 10.1007/s10900-020-00871-3.
HIV rapid testing algorithms (RTAs) using any two orthogonal rapid tests (RTs) allow for on-site confirmation of infection. RTs vary in performance characteristics therefore the selection of RTs in an algorithm may affect identification of infection, particularly if acute. National HIV Behavioral Surveillance (NHBS) assessed RTAs among men who have sex with men recruited using anonymous venue-based sampling. Different algorithms were evaluated among participants who self-reported never having received a positive HIV test result prior to the interview. NHBS project areas performed sequential or parallel RTs using whole blood. Participants with at least one reactive RT were offered anonymous linkage to care and provided a dried blood spot (DBS) for testing at CDC. Discordant results (RT-1 reactive/RT-2 non-reactive) were tested at CDC with lab protocols modified for DBS. DBS were also tested for HIV-1 RNA (VL) and antiretroviral (ARV) drug levels. Of 6500 RTAs, 238 were RT-1 reactive; of those, 97.1% (231/238) had concordant results (RT-1/RT-2 reactive) and 2.9% (7/238) had discordant results. Five DBS associated with discordant results were available for confirmation at CDC. Four had non-reactive confirmatory test results that implied RT-1 false reactivity; one had ambiguous confirmatory test results which was non-reactive in further testing. Regardless of order and type of RT used, RTAs demonstrated high concordant results in the population surveyed. Additional laboratory testing on DBS following discordant results confirmed no infection. Implementing RTAs in the context of anonymous venue-based HIV testing could be an option when laboratory follow-up is not practicable.
使用任意两种正交快速检测法(RT)的HIV快速检测算法(RTA)可实现现场感染确认。快速检测法的性能特征各不相同,因此算法中快速检测法的选择可能会影响感染的识别,尤其是在急性感染的情况下。国家HIV行为监测(NHBS)在通过基于场所的匿名抽样招募的男男性行为者中评估了快速检测算法。在访谈前自我报告从未获得过HIV检测阳性结果的参与者中对不同算法进行了评估。NHBS项目地区使用全血进行序贯或平行快速检测。至少有一次快速检测呈反应性的参与者可获得匿名的护理转介,并提供干血斑(DBS)用于在疾病预防控制中心进行检测。结果不一致的情况(RT-1呈反应性/RT-2无反应性)在疾病预防控制中心按照针对干血斑修改后的实验室方案进行检测。干血斑还进行了HIV-1 RNA(病毒载量)和抗逆转录病毒(ARV)药物水平检测。在6500次快速检测算法检测中,238次RT-1呈反应性;其中,97.1%(231/238)结果一致(RT-1/RT-2均呈反应性),2.9%(7/238)结果不一致。与结果不一致情况相关的5份干血斑可在疾病预防控制中心进行确认。4份干血斑的确认检测结果为无反应性,这意味着RT-1存在假反应性;1份干血斑的确认检测结果不明确,在进一步检测中无反应性。无论使用的快速检测法的顺序和类型如何,快速检测算法在接受调查的人群中均显示出高度一致的结果。结果不一致后对干血斑进行的额外实验室检测证实未感染。在无法进行实验室随访的情况下,在基于场所的匿名HIV检测中实施快速检测算法可能是一种选择。