ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2016
Evaluation of the Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx Assay Using Plasma and Dried Blood Spots.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The performance of using dried blood spot specimens for HIV-1 viral load testing: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PLoS medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Nucleic acid amplification testing using dried blood spots to confirm the diagnosis of HIV-1 in adults.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Performance evaluation of the Aptima HIV-1 RNA Quant assay on the Panther system using the standard and dilution protocols.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the Aptima HCV Quant Dx Assay Using Serum and Dried Blood Spots.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2019Article
- Multicenter Evaluation of Two Next-Generation HIV-1 Quantitation Assays, Aptima Quant Dx and Cobas 6800, in Comparison to the RealTiJournal of clinical microbiology · 2018Article
- Comparison of the Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx assay with the COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan HIV-1 v2.0 Test for HIV-1 viral load quantification in plasma samples from HIV-1-infected patients.Health science reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
HIV-1 RNA quantitation in plasma, or virus load testing, is the primary method by which the response to antiretroviral therapy is monitored. Here we describe evaluation of the Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx assay (Aptima) performed on the automated Panther system. The clinical performance of Aptima was compared to that of the Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1 Test v2.0 (CAP/CTM) using 162 EDTA plasma samples collected from patients undergoing HIV-1 monitoring. Overall agreement was 84.0% (136/162), with a kappa statistic of 0.723 (standard error, 0.047; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.630 to 0.815), indicating substantial agreement. Using the 86 clinical samples quantifiable by both methods, Passing-Bablok regression revealed a regression line of Y = (1.069 × X) - 0.346 (95% CI of the slope [1.003 to 1.139] and intercept [-0.666 to -0.074]), and Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated a mean difference (Aptima-CAP/CTM) of -0.075 log10 copies/ml (95% limits of agreement of -0.624 to 0.475), consistent with negative bias. Comparison of Aptima results for paired dried blood spot (DBS) and plasma specimens archived from participants in the Peninsula AIDS Research Cohort Study (PARC) demonstrated an overall agreement of 94.7% (90/95) when 1,000 copies/ml was used as the threshold. In conclusion, the Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx assay provides a suitable alternative for HIV-1 monitoring in plasma and DBS.
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.