Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Comparison of the Hologic Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx Assay to the Roche COBAS Ampliprep/COBAS TaqMan HIV-1 Test v2.0 for the quantification of HIV-1 RNA in plasma samples

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{ab8e52c5d7ac4e079d454c2536feec20,
title = "Comparison of the Hologic Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx Assay to the Roche COBAS Ampliprep/COBAS TaqMan HIV-1 Test v2.0 for the quantification of HIV-1 RNA in plasma samples",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: HIV-RNA is the most important parameter for monitoring antiviral treatment in individuals infected with HIV-1. Knowledge of the performance of different tests for the quantification of HIV-1 RNA is therefore important for clinical care.OBJECTIVES: To compare the analytical performance of the Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx Assay (Aptima) and the COBAS Ampliprep/COBAS TaqMan HIV-1 Test v2.0 (CAPCTMv2) for the quantification of HIV-1 RNA in plasma samples.STUDY DESIGN: The performance of the two tests was compared on 216 clinical plasma samples, on dilutions series in seven replicates of five clinical samples of known subtype and on ten replicates of the Acrometrix High and Low Positive Control.RESULTS: Bland-Altman analysis of 130 samples that quantified in both tests did not show indications of gross mis-quantification of either test. A tendency of the Aptima assay to quantify higher at high viral load compared to the CAPCTMv2 was observed in Bland-Altman analysis, by Deming regression (Slope 1.13) and in dilution series of clinical samples. Precision evaluated using the Acrometrix Positive Controls was similar for the High Control (CV: 1.2% vs. 1.3%; Aptima assay vs. CAPCTMv2 test, respectively), but differed for the Low control (CV: 17.9% vs. 7.1%; Aptima assay vs. CAPCTMv2 test, respectively). However, this did not impact clinical categorization of clinical samples at neither the 50 cp/mL nor 200 cp/mL level.CONCLUSION: The Aptima assay and the CAPCTMv2 test are highly correlated and are useful for monitoring HIV-infected individuals.",
keywords = "Journal Article",
author = "Kristian Sch{\o}nning and Kim Johansen and Bodil Landt and Thomas Benfield and Henrik Westh",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.",
year = "2017",
month = may,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jcv.2017.05.006",
language = "English",
volume = "92",
pages = "14--19",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Virology",
issn = "1386-6532",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of the Hologic Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx Assay to the Roche COBAS Ampliprep/COBAS TaqMan HIV-1 Test v2.0 for the quantification of HIV-1 RNA in plasma samples

AU - Schønning, Kristian

AU - Johansen , Kim

AU - Landt, Bodil

AU - Benfield, Thomas

AU - Westh, Henrik

N1 - Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: HIV-RNA is the most important parameter for monitoring antiviral treatment in individuals infected with HIV-1. Knowledge of the performance of different tests for the quantification of HIV-1 RNA is therefore important for clinical care.OBJECTIVES: To compare the analytical performance of the Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx Assay (Aptima) and the COBAS Ampliprep/COBAS TaqMan HIV-1 Test v2.0 (CAPCTMv2) for the quantification of HIV-1 RNA in plasma samples.STUDY DESIGN: The performance of the two tests was compared on 216 clinical plasma samples, on dilutions series in seven replicates of five clinical samples of known subtype and on ten replicates of the Acrometrix High and Low Positive Control.RESULTS: Bland-Altman analysis of 130 samples that quantified in both tests did not show indications of gross mis-quantification of either test. A tendency of the Aptima assay to quantify higher at high viral load compared to the CAPCTMv2 was observed in Bland-Altman analysis, by Deming regression (Slope 1.13) and in dilution series of clinical samples. Precision evaluated using the Acrometrix Positive Controls was similar for the High Control (CV: 1.2% vs. 1.3%; Aptima assay vs. CAPCTMv2 test, respectively), but differed for the Low control (CV: 17.9% vs. 7.1%; Aptima assay vs. CAPCTMv2 test, respectively). However, this did not impact clinical categorization of clinical samples at neither the 50 cp/mL nor 200 cp/mL level.CONCLUSION: The Aptima assay and the CAPCTMv2 test are highly correlated and are useful for monitoring HIV-infected individuals.

AB - BACKGROUND: HIV-RNA is the most important parameter for monitoring antiviral treatment in individuals infected with HIV-1. Knowledge of the performance of different tests for the quantification of HIV-1 RNA is therefore important for clinical care.OBJECTIVES: To compare the analytical performance of the Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx Assay (Aptima) and the COBAS Ampliprep/COBAS TaqMan HIV-1 Test v2.0 (CAPCTMv2) for the quantification of HIV-1 RNA in plasma samples.STUDY DESIGN: The performance of the two tests was compared on 216 clinical plasma samples, on dilutions series in seven replicates of five clinical samples of known subtype and on ten replicates of the Acrometrix High and Low Positive Control.RESULTS: Bland-Altman analysis of 130 samples that quantified in both tests did not show indications of gross mis-quantification of either test. A tendency of the Aptima assay to quantify higher at high viral load compared to the CAPCTMv2 was observed in Bland-Altman analysis, by Deming regression (Slope 1.13) and in dilution series of clinical samples. Precision evaluated using the Acrometrix Positive Controls was similar for the High Control (CV: 1.2% vs. 1.3%; Aptima assay vs. CAPCTMv2 test, respectively), but differed for the Low control (CV: 17.9% vs. 7.1%; Aptima assay vs. CAPCTMv2 test, respectively). However, this did not impact clinical categorization of clinical samples at neither the 50 cp/mL nor 200 cp/mL level.CONCLUSION: The Aptima assay and the CAPCTMv2 test are highly correlated and are useful for monitoring HIV-infected individuals.

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1016/j.jcv.2017.05.006

DO - 10.1016/j.jcv.2017.05.006

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 28505569

VL - 92

SP - 14

EP - 19

JO - Journal of Clinical Virology

JF - Journal of Clinical Virology

SN - 1386-6532

ER -

ID: 50563570