ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
Diagnostic effectiveness of HIV-1 quantitative nucleic acid assay as a supplementary test for individuals with indeterminate or negative western blot antibody test results - China, 2018-2023.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBased on China's current HIV-1 testing algorithm, samples with initial positive antibody screening require two additional repeat tests, with infection status confirmed by HIV-1 antibody Western Blot or nucleic acid testing (NAT). In recent years, NAT has gradually become the mainstream supplemental assay due to its shorter window period, holding significant importance in detecting acute HIV-1 infection. Currently, over 800 laboratories in China can perform HIV-1 NAT. However, most NAT kits are designed for viral load (VL) detection, typically used to assess treatment efficacy in confirmed patients. This study aimed to explore the diagnostic efficacy of HIV-1 quantitative NAT at varying medical decision points, as well as the methodological preference for antibody screening, to support better implementation of HIV-1 testing and accurate identification of HIV-1 infections in China.
methodsTesting records of 11,369 samples with WB-indeterminate or -negative results during 2018-2023 were collected from the central HIV confirmatory laboratory databases of 20 provincial CDCs. Methodological preferences in HIV-1 antibody screening, diagnostic performance of single- or double-reactive results in retesting and quantitative NAT at varying diagnostic thresholds were analyzed.
resultsChemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) was the most widely used method for initial screening (42.77%) and the seroconversion rate was significantly higher in cases with double-positive retest results compared to single-positive results (75.95% vs. 27.25% for WB-indeteminate results and 20.31% vs. 7.26% for WB-negative results, respectively). The specificity and positive predictive values of HIV-1 quantitative NAT were 100% at each medical decision points, and the sensitivity and negative predictive value decreased from 99.92% to 99.93% to 94.71% and 95.64%. Two samples with undetectable viral loads were ultimately diagnosed as HIV-1 infections, alerting us to consider individual exposure history when managing antibody screening-reactive but VL-undetectable cases.
conclusionsQuantitative HIV-1 NAT enables rapid and accurate infection confirmation, earlier identification and timely treatment initiation.
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.