ArticlePloS one2019
Development of an international external quality assurance program for HIV-1 incidence using the Limiting Antigen Avidity assay.
Article in PloS one, 2019. 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.
- Use of HIV Recency Assays for HIV Incidence Estimation and Other Surveillance Use Cases: Systematic Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2022Pooled it
- Longitudinal evaluation of HIV-1 LAg incidence assay and proficiency panel stability for external quality assurance.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Piloting an external quality assurance program (QAP) for COVID-19 antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs): findings and lessons learned from Cambodia.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Strengthening the Application of the DAIDS GCLP Guidelines: The Implementation of an Integrated Laboratory Oversight Framework.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2024Article
- A Stable Dried Tube Specimen for Quality Assurance and Training Programs for HIV Rapid Test for Recent Infection.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- 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
- Validation of population-level HIV-1 incidence estimation by cross-sectional incidence assays in the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2021Article
- Experiences and lessons learned from the real-world implementation of an HIV recent infection testing algorithm in three routine service-delivery settings in Kenya and Zimbabwe.BMC health services research · 2021Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Laboratory assays for identifying recent HIV-1 infections are widely used for estimating incidence in cross-sectional population-level surveys in global HIV-1surveillance. Adequate assay and laboratory performance are required to ensure accurate incidence estimates. The NIAID-supported External Quality Assurance Program Oversight Laboratory (EQAPOL) established a proficiency testing program for the most widely-used incidence assay, the HIV-1 Limiting Antigen Avidity EIA (LAg), with US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-approved kits manufactured by Sedia Biosciences Corporation and Maxim Biomedical. The objective of this program is to monitor the performance of participating laboratories. Four rounds of blinded external proficiency (EP) panels were distributed to up to twenty testing sites (7 North American, 5 African, 4 Asian, 2 South American and 2 European). These panels consisted of ten plasma samples: three blinded well-characterized HIV-1-seropositive samples that were included as replicates and an HIV-negative control. The seropositive samples spanned the dynamic range of the assay and are categorized as either recent or long-term infection. Participating sites performed the assay according to manufacturers' instructions and completed an online survey to gather information on kit manufacturer, lot of kit used, laboratory procedures and the experience of technicians. On average, fifteen sites participated in each round of testing, with an average of four sites testing with only the Maxim assay, seven testing with only the Sedia assay and five sites utilizing both assays. Overall, the Sedia and Maxim assays yielded similar infection status categorization across the laboratories; however, for most of the nine HIV+ samples tested, there were significant differences in the optical density readouts, ODn (N = 8) and OD (N = 7), between LAg kit manufacturers (p < 0.05 based on mixed effects models. The EQAPOL LAg program is important for monitoring laboratory performance as well as detecting variations between manufacturers of HIV-1incidence 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.