ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2000
Quantitative and cost comparison of ultrasensitive human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA viral load assays: Bayer bDNA quantiplex versions 3.0 and 2.0 and Roche PCR Amplicor monitor version 1.5.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 75 citations in OpenAlex.
- ART suppresses plasma HIV-1 RNA to a stable set point predicted by pretherapy viremia.PLoS pathogens · 2007Trial
- Effect of IL-2 therapy on CD8+ cell noncytotoxic anti-HIV response during primary HIV-1 infection.Journal of clinical immunology · 2004Trial
- Pilot studies for development of an HIV subtype panel for surveillance of global diversity.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2012Article
- Current practices in laboratory monitoring of HIV infection.The Indian journal of medical research · 2011Review
- Instrument-free nucleic acid amplification assays for global health settings.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2011Article
- HIV screening via fourth-generation immunoassay or nucleic acid amplification test in the United States: a cost-effectiveness analysis.PloS one · 2011Article
- Monitoring virologic responses to antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults in Kenya: evaluation of a low-cost viral load assay.PloS one · 2009Article
- Reliability at the lower limits of HIV-1 RNA quantification in clinical samples: a comparison of RT-PCR versus bDNA assays.PloS one · 2009Article
- CD8+ cell anti-HIV activity rapidly increases upon discontinuation of early antiretroviral therapy.Journal of clinical immunology · 2009Article
- Cost-effectiveness of HIV monitoring strategies in resource-limited settings: a southern African analysis.Archives of internal medicine · 2008Article
- Optimizing screening for acute human immunodeficiency virus infection with pooled nucleic acid amplification tests.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2008Article
- HIV-1 viral load assays for resource-limited settings.PLoS medicine · 2006Review
- Impact of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) genetic diversity on performance of four commercial viral load assays: LCx HIV RNA Quantitative, AMPLICOR HIV-1 MONITOR v1.5, VERSANT HIV-1 RNA 3.0, and NucliSens HIV-1 QT.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2005Article
- New real-time reverse transcriptase-initiated PCR assay with single-copy sensitivity for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA in plasma.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2003Article
- Intrapatient diversity and its correlation with viral setpoint in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 CRF02_A/G-IbNG infection.Journal of virology · 2002Article
- Quantitation of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA in cell-free cervicovaginal secretions: comparison of reverse transcription-PCR amplification (AMPLICOR HIV-A MONITOR 1.5) with enhanced-sensitivity branched-DNA assay (Quantiplex 3.0).Journal of clinical microbiology · 2001Article
- Intra- and interlaboratory variabilities of results obtained with the Quantiplex human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA bDNA assay, version 3.0.Clinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology · 2001Article
- Comparative performance of three viral load assays on human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) isolates representing group M (subtypes A to G) and group O: LCx HIV RNA quantitative, AMPLICOR HIV-1 MONITOR version 1.5, and Quantiplex HIV-1 RNA version 3.0.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2001Article
- Multicenter comparison of Roche COBAS AMPLICOR MONITOR version 1.5, Organon Teknika NucliSens QT with Extractor, and Bayer Quantiplex version 3.0 for quantification of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA in plasma.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2000Article
- The cost-effectiveness of counseling strategies to improve adherence to highly active antiretroviral therapy among men who have sex with men.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision MakingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quantification of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA as a measure of viral load has greatly improved the monitoring of therapies for infected individuals. With the significant reductions in viral load now observed in individuals treated with highly active anti-retroviral therapy (HAART), viral load assays have been adapted to achieve greater sensitivity. Two commercially available ultrasensitive assays, the Bayer Quantiplex HIV-1 bDNA version 3.0 (bDNA 3.0) assay and the Roche Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor Ultrasensitive version 1.5 (Amplicor 1.5) assay, are now being used to monitor HIV-1-infected individuals. Both of these ultrasensitive assays have a reported lower limit of 50 HIV-1 RNA copies/ml and were developed from corresponding older generation assays with lower limits of 400 to 500 copies/ml. However, the comparability of viral load data generated by these ultrasensitive assays and the relative costs of labor, disposables, and biohazardous wastes were not determined in most cases. In this study, we used matched clinical plasma samples to compare the quantification of the newer bDNA 3.0 assay with that of the older bDNA 2.0 assay and to compare the quantification and costs of the bDNA 3.0 assay and the Amplicor 1.5 assay. We found that quantification by the bDNA 3.0 assay was approximately twofold higher than that by the bDNA 2.0 assay and was highly correlated to that by the Amplicor 1.5 assay. Moreover, cost analysis based on labor, disposables, and biohazardous wastes showed significant savings with the bDNA 3.0 assay as compared to the costs of the Amplicor 1.5 assay.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.