Sahu Maitreyi, Schaafsma Torin, Szpiro Adam A, Van Rooyen Heidi, Asiimwe Stephen, Shahmanesh Maryam, Krows Meighan L, Sithole Nsika, Van Heerden Alastair, Barnabas Ruanne V
Department of Health Metrics Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
AIDS. 2024 Dec 1;38(15):2050-2055. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000004011. Epub 2024 Sep 12.
Evaluate the clinical utility of patient-collected dried blood spots (DBS) in measuring HIV-1 viral load (VL) for monitoring antiretroviral therapy (ART) compared to provider-collected DBS and blood plasma.
In a randomized trial of community-based delivery of ART in South Africa, we assessed performance of: DBS specimens compared to plasma, and participant-collected vs. staff-collected DBS specimens, to measure HIV-1 VL.
The bioMérieux NucliSENS EasyQ HIV-1 v2.0 assay was used for VL measurement. From October 2017 to November 2019, we collected 996 pairs of plasma/DBS specimens from 760 participants and 315 pairs of staff-/participant-collected DBS cards from 261 participants. We assessed DBS test sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) using the WHO failure threshold of 1000 copies/ml. Log-transformed VL was compared using concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) and mean differences from linear mixed models.
In a population with 13% detectable VL, DBS VL compared with plasma VL had 91% [95% confidence interval (CI): 86-95] sensitivity, 99% (98-100) specificity, 94% (90-98) PPV, and 99% (98-99) NPV. We observed high agreement between staff-collected DBS VL and plasma VL (CCC: 0.94), and between participant-collected DBS VL and plasma VL (CCC: 0.92). We did not observe a statistically significant difference between participant- and staff-collected DBS VL and correlation was very high (CCC: 0.97).
VL results from participant-collected DBS are clinically comparable with those collected by clinical staff and using blood plasma. Self-collected DBS has potential for use for ART monitoring outside the clinic.
与医护人员采集的干血斑(DBS)及血浆相比,评估患者自行采集的DBS在测量HIV-1病毒载量(VL)以监测抗逆转录病毒治疗(ART)中的临床实用性。
在南非一项基于社区提供ART的随机试验中,我们评估了用于测量HIV-1 VL的DBS标本与血浆相比,以及参与者采集的与医护人员采集的DBS标本的性能。
使用生物梅里埃公司的NucliSENS EasyQ HIV-1 v2.0检测法进行VL测量。2017年10月至2019年11月,我们从760名参与者中收集了996对血浆/DBS标本,从261名参与者中收集了315对医护人员/参与者采集的DBS卡片。我们使用世界卫生组织设定的1000拷贝/ml的失败阈值评估DBS检测的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)。使用一致性相关系数(CCC)和线性混合模型的平均差异对经对数转换的VL进行比较。
在病毒载量可检测的人群中,DBS病毒载量与血浆病毒载量相比,敏感性为91%[95%置信区间(CI):86 - 95],特异性为99%(98 - 100),PPV为94%(90 - 98),NPV为99%(98 - 99)。我们观察到医护人员采集的DBS病毒载量与血浆病毒载量之间高度一致(CCC:0.94),参与者采集的DBS病毒载量与血浆病毒载量之间高度一致(CCC:0.92)。我们未观察到参与者采集的与医护人员采集的DBS病毒载量之间存在统计学显著差异,且相关性非常高(CCC:0.97)。
参与者采集的DBS的病毒载量结果在临床上与临床工作人员采集的以及使用血浆检测的结果具有可比性。自行采集的DBS有潜力用于门诊以外的抗逆转录病毒治疗监测。