Author
Listed:
- Derryck B Klarkowski
- Joseph M Wazome
- Kamalini M Lokuge
- Leslie Shanks
- Clair F Mills
- Daniel P O'Brien
Abstract
Background: Concerns about false-positive HIV results led to a review of testing procedures used in a Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) HIV programme in Bukavu, eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. In addition to the WHO HIV rapid diagnostic test algorithm (RDT) (two positive RDTs alone for HIV diagnosis) used in voluntary counselling and testing (VCT) sites we evaluated in situ a practical field-based confirmation test against western blot WB. In addition, we aimed to determine the false-positive rate of the WHO two-test algorithm compared with our adapted protocol including confirmation testing, and whether weakly reactive compared with strongly reactive rapid test results were more likely to be false positives. Methodology/Principal Findings: 2864 clients presenting to MSF VCT centres in Bukavu during January to May 2006 were tested using Determine HIV-1/2® and UniGold HIV® rapid tests in parallel by nurse counsellors. Plasma samples on 229 clients confirmed as double RDT positive by laboratory retesting were further tested using both WB and the Orgenics Immunocomb Combfirm® HIV confirmation test (OIC-HIV). Of these, 24 samples were negative or indeterminate by WB representing a false-positive rate of the WHO two-test algorithm of 10.5% (95%CI 6.6-15.2). 17 of the 229 samples were weakly positive on rapid testing and all were negative or indeterminate by WB. The false-positive rate fell to 3.3% (95%CI 1.3–6.7) when only strong-positive rapid test results were considered. Agreement between OIC-HIV and WB was 99.1% (95%CI 96.9–99.9%) with no false OIC-HIV positives if stringent criteria for positive OIC-HIV diagnoses were used. Conclusions: The WHO HIV two-test diagnostic algorithm produced an unacceptably high level of false-positive diagnoses in our setting, especially if results were weakly positive. The most probable causes of the false-positive results were serological cross-reactivity or non-specific immune reactivity. Our findings show that the OIC-HIV confirmation test is practical and effective in field contexts. We propose that all double-positive HIV RDT samples should undergo further testing to confirm HIV seropositivity until the accuracy of the RDT testing algorithm has been established at programme level.
Suggested Citation
Derryck B Klarkowski & Joseph M Wazome & Kamalini M Lokuge & Leslie Shanks & Clair F Mills & Daniel P O'Brien, 2009.
"The Evaluation of a Rapid In Situ HIV Confirmation Test in a Programme with a High Failure Rate of the WHO HIV Two-Test Diagnostic Algorithm,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(2), pages 1-6, February.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0004351
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004351
Download full text from publisher
Citations
Citations are extracted by the
CitEc Project, subscribe to its
RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Arielle Lasry & Mireille B Kalou & Paul R Young & Jacqueline Rurangirwa & Bharat Parekh & Stephanie Behel, 2019.
"Cost implications of HIV retesting for verification in Africa,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-15, July.
- Leslie Shanks & Koert Ritmeijer & Erwan Piriou & M Ruby Siddiqui & Jarmila Kliescikova & Neil Pearce & Cono Ariti & Libsework Muluneh & Johnson Masiga & Almaz Abebe, 2015.
"Accounting for False Positive HIV Tests: Is Visceral Leishmaniasis Responsible?,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-8, July.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0004351. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.