This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Best, S. J.
Right arrow Articles by Dax, E. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Best, S. J.
Right arrow Articles by Dax, E. M.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 2000, p. 4015-4020, Vol. 38, No. 11
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Quality of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Viral Load Testing in Australia

Susan J. Best,* Anthony P. Gust, Elizabeth I. M. Johnson, Catherine H. McGavin, and Elizabeth M. Dax

National Serology Reference Laboratory, Australia, at St Vincent's Institute of Medical Research, Fitzroy, Victoria 3065, Australia

Received 2 May 2000/Returned for modification 29 June 2000/Accepted 30 August 2000

This study determined the proficiencies of laboratories measuring human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) viral loads and the accuracies of two assays used for HIV-1 viral load measurement in Australia and investigated the variability of the new versions of these assays. Quality assessment program panels containing (i) dilutions of HIV-1 subtype B, (ii) replicates of identical samples of HIV-1 subtype B, and (iii) samples of subtype E and B were tested by laboratories. Total variability (within and between laboratories) was tested with quality control samples. The coefficients of variation (CVs) for the Roche AMPLICOR HIV-1 MONITOR version (v) 1.0 and Chiron Quantiplex bDNA 2.0 assays ranged from 53 to 87% and 22 to 31%, respectively. The widespread occurrence of invalid runs with the AMPLICOR HIV-1 MONITOR 1.0 assay was identified. The CVs of the new versions of the assays were 82 to 86% for the AMPLICOR HIV-1 MONITOR v 1.5 assay and 16 to 23% for the Quantiplex bDNA 3.0 assay. For virus dilution samples, all but 5 of 19 laboratories obtained results within 2 standard deviations of the mean. The Quantiplex bDNA 2.0 assay reported values lower than those reported by the AMPLICOR HIV-1 MONITOR version 1.0 assay for samples containing HIV-1 subtype B, whereas the reverse was true for subtype E. Identification and resolution of the problem of invalid runs markedly improved the quality of HIV-1 viral load testing. The variability observed between laboratories and between assays, even the most recent versions, dictates that monitoring of viral load in an individual should always be by the same laboratory and by the same assay. Results for an individual which differ by less than 0.5 log10 HIV-1 RNA copy number/ml should not be considered clinically significant.


* Corresponding author. Mailing address: National Serology Reference Laboratory, Australia, at St Vincent's Institute of Medical Research, 41 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Vic 3065, Australia. Phone: 61 3 9418 1111. Fax: 61 3 9418 1155. E-mail: sue{at}nrl.gov.au.


Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 2000, p. 4015-4020, Vol. 38, No. 11
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.