Comparative evaluation of 36 commercial assays for detecting antibodies to HIV
- PMID: 1786625
- PMCID: PMC2393330
Comparative evaluation of 36 commercial assays for detecting antibodies to HIV
Abstract
Summarized are the results of an assessment of the major operational characteristics of 36 commercially available assays for detection of antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and/or type 2 (HIV-2). For this purpose, 20 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), 11 simple immunoassays with visual reading, four supplemental assays, and one discriminatory assay were assessed using a panel of 537 sera (65% of which were of African, 26% of European, and 9% of South American origin); the prevalence of HIV-1 was 39.1% and of HIV-2, 15.7%. The following operational parameters of the assays were investigated: ease of performance; suitability for use in small blood collection centres; sensitivity and specificity; positive predictive values at different prevalences; inter-reader variability for simple assays whose results were read visually; the proportion of indeterminate results; and, for some of the ELISA assays, delta-values, as quantitative measures of sensitivity and specificity. The results will be of use to health policy decision-makers, managers of national AIDS prevention and control programmes, directors of blood banks, and laboratory specialists in the selection of appropriate HIV antibody assays.
PIP: Microbiologists at the Institute of Tropical Medicine in Antwerp, Belgium used sera from 537 people (65% Africans, 26% Europeans, and 9% South Americans) to compare commercial assays for detecting HIV antibodies. These assays included 20 ELISAs, 11 simple assays, 4 supplemental assays, and 1 discriminatory assay. HIV-1 seroprevalence was 39.1% and 15.7% for HIV-2. Basically the sensitivity of the assays were very good and equal, except the sensitivity of the Peptide HIV ELISA assay was considerably lower. In fact, on the most part, the sensitivities were higher than the specificities. But only 4 assays had significantly lower specificities than sensitivities. A high number of false positive reactions occurred in the African sera with these 4 assays which emphasizes the need to use African sera to evaluate HIV antibody kits. The higher the positive and negative Delta values the more likely the assay can accurately identify antibody positive and antibody negative sera respectively. The Elavia Mixt (HIV-1+2) and the Wellcozyme HIV-1+2 had the highest positive Delta value while Abbott recombinant HIV-1/HIV-2 EIA had the lowest positive value. Du Pont HIV-1/HIV-2 had the lowest negative value. No significant difference existed in determining sensitivity and specificity by visually reading the results between the simple assays. Interreader variability ranged from 0.8-31.7% with Recodot and Genie HIV-1 and HIV-2 having the highest variability. Further no significant difference existed in sensitivity and specificity between the ELISAs. The Ancoscreen supplemental assay did not have high sensitivity and specificity when used on African sera. Further INNO-LIA HIV-1/HIV-2 Ab test detected both HIV-1 and HIV-2 antibodies at the same time and ranked lower in indeterminant results than the Western blot.
Similar articles
-
Strategies for laboratory HIV testing: an examination of alternative approaches not requiring Western blot.Bull World Health Organ. 1994;72(1):129-34. Bull World Health Organ. 1994. PMID: 8131248 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of commercial kits for the detection of antibody to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) in Nigeria.East Afr Med J. 1990 Mar;67(3):209-13. East Afr Med J. 1990. PMID: 2191859
-
Serological diagnosis of human immuno-deficiency virus in Burkina Faso: reliable, practical strategies using less expensive commercial test kits.Bull World Health Organ. 1999;77(9):731-9. Bull World Health Organ. 1999. PMID: 10534896 Free PMC article.
-
Assessing specificity for immunogenicity assays.Bioanalysis. 2009 Jun;1(3):611-7. doi: 10.4155/bio.09.41. Bioanalysis. 2009. PMID: 21083156 Review.
-
An overview of various labeled assays used in medical laboratory diagnosis. Immune and non-immune assays.Saudi Med J. 2010 Apr;31(4):359-68. Saudi Med J. 2010. PMID: 20383411 Review.
Cited by
-
Strategies for laboratory HIV testing: an examination of alternative approaches not requiring Western blot.Bull World Health Organ. 1994;72(1):129-34. Bull World Health Organ. 1994. PMID: 8131248 Free PMC article.
-
Usefulness of enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for screening of anti HIV antibodies in urinary specimens: A comparative analysis.Med J Armed Forces India. 2014 Jul;70(3):211-4. doi: 10.1016/j.mjafi.2013.10.011. Epub 2013 Dec 16. Med J Armed Forces India. 2014. PMID: 25378771 Free PMC article.
-
Challenges in interpreting SARS-CoV-2 serological results in African countries.Lancet Glob Health. 2021 May;9(5):e588-e589. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00060-7. Epub 2021 Feb 17. Lancet Glob Health. 2021. PMID: 33609481 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
False-positive results of enzyme immunoassays for human immunodeficiency virus in patients with uncomplicated malaria.J Clin Microbiol. 2006 Aug;44(8):3021-4. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02207-05. J Clin Microbiol. 2006. PMID: 16891532 Free PMC article.
-
Quantitative detection of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antigen by the Enzymun-Test: comparison with alternative assays and nucleic acid sequence-based amplification of HIV type 1 RNA.J Clin Microbiol. 1996 Jun;34(6):1440-7. doi: 10.1128/jcm.34.6.1440-1447.1996. J Clin Microbiol. 1996. PMID: 8735095 Free PMC article.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources