Comparative field evaluation of HIV rapid diagnostic assays using serum, urine, and oral mucosal transudate specimens

David R. Tribble*, Guénaël R. Rodier, Magdy D. Saad, Gérard Binson, Fabrice Marrot, Said Salah, Chakib Omar, Ray R. Arthur

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Comparative field utility of selected HIV-1 assays using homologous collections of serum, urine and oral mucosal transudate (OMT) was determined in adult populations from a tuberculosis hospital and STD clinic in Dijbouti, East Africa. Study design:Enzyme immunoassay with confirmatory Western blot was performed on all serum specimens for comparison with rapid, instrument-free assays (SUDS HIV-1, Murex; TestPack HIV-1/2, Abbot; and COMBAIDS HIV 1 + 2, SPAN Diagnostics) using various specimen sources. Delayed (48 h post-collection) testing was also performed on urine. Sensitivity and specificity for the rapid assays, in descending order, were as follows: serum SUDS HIV-1 assay (100%, 98.3%), serum COMBAIDS HIV-1/2 assay (98.4%, 99.6%), and OMT SUDS HIV-1 assay (98.4%, 94.5%). Results: The OMT EIA optical density cutoff value was modified resulting in an improved specificity from 89.1 to 99.6%; however, sensitivity decreased from 100 to 98.5%. Urine EIA and rapid assays demonstrated unacceptable test performance for use as a screening test.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)127-132
Number of pages6
JournalClinical and Diagnostic Virology
Volume7
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1997
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • AIDS
  • Enzyme immunoassay
  • HIV
  • Oral mucosal transudate
  • Rapid assay
  • Urine
  • Western blot

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative field evaluation of HIV rapid diagnostic assays using serum, urine, and oral mucosal transudate specimens'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this