ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2020
Difficulties of Identifying the Early HIV Antibody Seroconversion Period Depending on the Confirmatory Assay.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIdentification of HIV infection at the early stage is valuable for patient management, for prevention, and for research purposes. In practice, identification of a recent HIV infection at diagnosis proves challenging after HIV antibody seroconversion but can be suspected using Western blots (WBs) or immunoblots (IBs) as confirmatory assays.
methodsFive commercially available confirmatory assays were compared using 43 samples from recently infected individuals. This included 2 WBs (New LAV Blot I, Biorad, and HIV Blot 2.2, MP Biomedicals), 2 IBs (INNO-LIA HIV I/II, Fujirebio, and RecomLine HIV-1 & HIV-2, Mikrogen Diagnostik), and 1 immunochromatographic single-use assay (Geenius HIV1/2 supplemental assay, Biorad).
resultsFollowing the manufacturer's recommendations for interpretation, the 2 WBs led to indeterminate results for 30% and 42% of the samples, suggesting recent infection, compared with 2%-7% for the 3 other assays. When interpreted based on the Fiebig classification, concordant stages were observed in 42% of samples, and only 49% were classified as early seroconversion by all 5 assays. For the remaining specimens, the distinction with chronic infection was highly variable depending on the assay (5%-100%).
conclusionsClinical laboratories must consider this variability, which must be kept in mind both for initial diagnosis and for multicenter studies for which inclusion criteria refer to serological profiles by confirmatory 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.