ArticleAIDS research and human retroviruses2019
Evaluation of the Performance of Three Biomarker Assays for Recent HIV Infection Using a Well-Characterized HIV-1 Subtype C Incidence Cohort.
Article in AIDS research and human retroviruses, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of HIV Recency Assays for HIV Incidence Estimation and Other Surveillance Use Cases: Systematic Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2022Pooled it
- Cervicovaginal cytokine profiles and their associations with colposcopic findings in adolescent girls and adult women in South Africa: an exploratory cross-sectional study.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Using HIV antibody measurements to detect viral load rebound: An analysis from an analytic treatment interruption study in the United States.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2026Observational
- The Asanté™ HIV-1 Rapid Recency® Assay is reliable, feasible, and acceptable for use at the point-of-care in Lusaka, Zambia.PloS one · 2026Article
- Evaluation of multi-assay algorithms for cross-sectional HIV incidence estimation in settings with universal antiretroviral treatment.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Article
- A systematic review of limiting antigen avidity enzyme immunoassay for detection of recent HIV-1 infection to expand supported applications.Journal of virus eradication · 2022Review
- Article
- Performance evaluation of the Asante Rapid Recency Assay for verification of HIV diagnosis and detection of recent HIV-1 infections: Implications for epidemic control.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- Challenges to the performance of current HIV diagnostic assays and the need for centralized specimen archives: a review of the Consortium for the Evaluation and Performance of HIV Incidence Assays (CEPHIA) repository.Gates open research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Biomarkers for detecting early HIV infection and estimating HIV incidence should minimize false-recent rates (FRRs) while maximizing mean duration of recent infection (MDRI). We compared HIV subtypes B, E and D (BED) capture enzyme immunoassay (BED), Sedia limiting antigen (LAg) avidity enzyme immunoassay, and Bio-Rad avidity incidence (BRAI) assays using samples from Zimbabwean postpartum women infected with clade C HIV. We calculated MDRIs using 590 samples from 351 seroconverting postpartum women, and FRRs using samples from 2,825 women known to be HIV positive for >12 months. Antibody kinetics were more predictable with LAg and had higher precision compared with BED or BRAI. BRAI also exhibited more variability, and avidity reversal in some cases. For BED, LAg, and BRAI, used alone or with viral load, MDRI values in days were: BED-188 and 170 at normalized optical density (ODn) 0.8; LAg-104 and 100 at ODn cutoff 1.5; BRAI-135 and 134 at avidity index cutoff 30%. Corresponding FRRs were: BRAI 1.1% and 1.0% and LAg 0.57% and 0.35%: these were 3.8-10.9 times lower than BED values of 4.8% and 3.8%. BRAI and LAg have significantly lower FRRs and MDRIs than in published studies, and much lower than BED and could be used to estimate incidence in perinatal women and to measure population-level HIV incidence in HIV control operations in Africa.
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.