ArticlePloS one2015
Performance of an in-house human immunodeficiency virus type 1 genotyping system for assessment of drug resistance in Cuba.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nationwide Molecular Epidemiology of HIV-1 in Uruguay (2007-2021): Lineage Diversity, BF1 Recombinant Complexity and Epidemiological Patterns.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2026Article
- Review
- Cost analysis of implementing HIV drug resistance testing in Kenya: a case study of a service delivery site at a tertiary level hospital in Kenya.F1000Research · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As commercial human immunodeficiency virus type 1 drug resistance assays are expensive, they are not commonly used in resource-limited settings. Hence, a more affordable in-house procedure was set up taking into account the specific epidemiological and economic circumstances of Cuba. The performance characteristics of the in-house assay were evaluated using clinical samples with various subtypes and resistance patterns. The lower limit of amplification was determined on dilutions series of 20 clinical isolates and ranged from 84 to 529 RNA copies/mL. For the assessment of trueness, 14 clinical samples were analyzed and the ViroSeq HIV-1 Genotyping System v2.0 was used as the reference standard. The mean nucleotide sequence identity between the two assays was 98.7% ± 1.0. Additionally, 99.0% of the amino acids at drug resistance positions were identical. The sensitivity and specificity in detecting drug resistance mutations was respectively 94.1% and 99.5%. Only few discordances in drug resistance interpretation patterns were observed. The repeatability and reproducibility were evaluated using 10 clinical samples with 3 replicates per sample. The in-house test was very precise as nucleotide sequence identity among paired nucleotide sequences ranged from 98.7% to 99.9%. The acceptance criteria were met by the in-house test for all performance characteristics, demonstrating a high degree of accuracy. Subsequently, the applicability in routine clinical practice was evaluated on 380 plasma samples. The amplification success rate was 91% and good quality consensus sequences encoding the entire protease and the first 335 codons in reverse transcriptase could be obtained for 99% of the successful amplicons. The reagent cost per sample using the in-house procedure was around € 80 per genotyping attempt. Overall, the in-house assay provided good results, was feasible with equipment and reagents available in Cuba and was half as expensive as commercial assays.
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.