ArticlePloS one2026
Feasibility and reliability of decentralized HIV-1 viral load monitoring on self-sampled blood.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHome-based blood self-sampling for HIV-1 viral load (VL) monitoring has the potential to alleviate pressure on healthcare systems by reducing clinic visits for people with HIV. This study evaluates the feasibility and reliability of HIV-RNA measurements in self-sampled blood and in viremic samples.
methodsBetween September 2024 and March 2025 participants were recruited at the outpatient clinic. Self-sampled blood was collected using the TassoPlus device at home and compared to conventional HIV-RNA testing from the same individual. Only samples containing a minimum volume of 200 μL plasma were deemed eligible for analysis. Also, 30 stored viremic samples (HIV-1 RNA 100-950 copies/mL) aliquoted into 200 μL volumes were included and compared to conventional HIV-RNA testing. The Alinity m HIV-1 assay (Abbott), validated for low plasma volumes, was used for all samples. Agreement was assessed using Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman analysis. Sample quality was assessed based on plasma volume and clotting. User-friendliness of the TassoPlus was evaluated through a questionnaire.
resultsOf the 62 participants (median age 56 [46-66]; 81% male), 63% (n = 38) returned the sample, yielding a mean plasma volume of 207 μL (range:10-550). Of these, 18 samples (29%) were excluded due to insufficient volume for analysis. HIV-RNA in both self-sampled and stored samples (n = 50), correlated with conventional samples (r = 0.800). However, in four low-volume viremic samples, HIV-RNA was <100 copies/mL, while conventional sampling detected 148, 260, 501 and 759 copies/mL, respectively. Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference of 0.08 log copies/mL (95%LOA:-0.79-0.95) between conventional sampled blood and low-volume samples (self-sampled/stored samples). No clotting was observed. Furthermore, 57% of participants expressed interest in using the TassoPlus, and 48% rated its usability as easy or very easy. DISCUSSION: Self-sampling with TassoPlus presents challenges, including high rates of unsuccessful sampling and potential failure to detect low-level viremia. Therefore, significant refinements are essential for reliable clinical use.
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.