Evaluation of the Whole-Blood Alere Q NAT Point-of-Care RNA Assay for HIV-1 Viral Load Monitoring in a Primary Health Care Setting in Mozambique.

Viral load testing is the WHO-recommended monitoring assay for patients on HIV antiretroviral therapy (ART). Point-of-care (POC) assays may help improve access to viral load testing in resource-limited settings. We compared the performance of the Alere Q NAT POC viral load technology (Alere Technologies, Jena, Germany), measuring total HIV RNA using finger prick capillary whole-blood samples collected in a periurban health center, with that of a laboratory-based plasma RNA test (Roche Cobas Ampliprep/Cobas TaqMan v2) conducted on matched venous blood samples. The whole-blood Alere Q NAT POC assay produced results with a bias of 0.8593 log copy/ml compared to the laboratory-based plasma assay. However, at above 10,000 copies/ml, the bias was 0.07 log copy/ml. Using the WHO-recommended threshold to determine ART failure of 1,000 copies/ml, the sensitivity and specificity of the whole-blood Alere Q NAT POC assay were 96.83% and 47.80%, respectively. A cutoff of 10,000 copies/ml of whole blood with the Alere Q NAT POC assay appears to be a better predictor of ART failure threshold (1,000 copies/ml of plasma), with a sensitivity of 84.0% and specificity of 90.3%. The precision of the whole-blood Alere Q NAT POC assay was comparable to that observed with the laboratory technology (5.4% versus 7.5%) between detectable paired samples. HIV POC viral load testing is feasible at the primary health care level. Further research on the value of whole-blood viral load to monitor antiretroviral therapy is warranted.

Accurate early infant HIV diagnosis in primary health clinics using a point-of-care nucleic acid test.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of a point-of-care (POC) nucleic acid-based test (NAT) for early infant HIV diagnosis (EID) in primary health clinics in Mozambique. METHODS: POC and laboratory NAT EID tests were conducted on matched blood samples collected from 827 HIV-exposed infants younger than 18 months who were enrolled consecutively at 4 periurban primary health clinics and the central hospital in Maputo. Lancet heel draw blood collected by nurses was tested on site for HIV-1/-2 RNA on the Alere HIV NAT POC device and also used to create dried blood spots for later laboratory EID testing on the Roche Cobas Taqman/Ampliprep instrument. Results were used to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and agreement between the POC and laboratory NAT EID tests. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of POC NAT EID testing were 98·5% (95% confidence interval (CI): 91.7 to 99.9, n = 65) and 99·9% (95% CI: 99.3 to 100, n = 762), respectively, compared with laboratory EID tests. Overall agreement was high (Cohen kappa = 0·981; 95% CI: 0.96 to 1.00). Positive (98·5%; 95% CI: 96·3 to 100) and negative 99.9% (95% CI: 99.7 to 100) test agreement was also high. CONCLUSIONS: Primary health care nurses accurately performed POC NAT EID testing within primary health care clinics. On-site nucleic acid-based EID testing is technically feasible in clinic settings and could be used in efforts to improve access to pediatric HIV antiretroviral treatment.

Evaluating operational specifications of point-of-care diagnostic tests: a standardized scorecard.

The expansion of HIV antiretroviral therapy into decentralized rural settings will increasingly require simple point-of-care (POC) diagnostic tests that can be used without laboratory infrastructure and technical skills. New POC test devices are becoming available but decisions around which technologies to deploy may be biased without systematic assessment of their suitability for decentralized healthcare settings. To address this, we developed a standardized, quantitative scorecard tool to objectively evaluate the operational characteristics of POC diagnostic devices. The tool scores devices on a scale of 1-5 across 30 weighted characteristics such as ease of use, quality control, electrical requirements, shelf life, portability, cost and service, and provides a cumulative score that ranks products against a set of ideal POC characteristics. The scorecard was tested on 19 devices for POC CD4 T-lymphocyte cell counting, clinical chemistry or hematology testing. Single and multi-parameter devices were assessed in each of test categories. The scores across all devices ranged from 2.78 to 4.40 out of 5. The tool effectively ranked devices within each category (p<0.01) except the CD4 and multi-parameter hematology products. The tool also enabled comparison of different characteristics between products. Agreement across the four scorers for each product was high (intra-class correlation >0.80; p<0.001). Use of this tool enables the systematic evaluation of diagnostic tests to facilitate product selection and investment in appropriate technology. It is particularly relevant for countries and testing programs considering the adoption of new POC diagnostic tests.

Performance of the PointCare NOW system for CD4 counting in HIV patients based on five independent evaluations.

INTRODUCTION: Point-of-care (POC) CD4 testing can improve access to treatment by enabling decentralization and reducing patient loss-to-follow-up. As new POC CD4 technologies become available, their performance should be assessed before widespread deployment. This study reports the findings of five independent evaluations of the PointCare NOW CD4 system. MATERIALS/METHODS: Evaluations were conducted in Southern Africa (Mozambique, South Africa) and North America (Canada, USA). 492 blood samples (55 from HIV-negative blood donors and 437 from HIV-infected patients, including 20 children aged between 12 and 59 months) were tested with both the PointCare NOW and reference flow cytometry instruments. Assessment of bias, precision and levels of clinical misclassification for absolute and percent CD4 count was conducted. RESULTS: PointCare NOW significantly overestimated CD4 absolute counts with a mean relative bias of +35.0%. Bias was greater in samples with CD4 counts below ≤ 350 cells/µl (+51.3%) than in the CD4 >350 cells/µl stratum (15.1%). Bias in CD4% had a similar trend with an overall relative mean bias of +25.6% and a larger bias for low CD4 stratum (+40.2%) than the higher CD4 stratum (+5.8%). Relative bias for CD4% in children was -6.8%. In terms of repeatability, PointCare NOW had a coefficient of variation of 11%. Using a threshold of 350 cells/µl, only 47% of patients who qualified for antiretroviral therapy with reference CD4 testing, would have been eligible for treatment with PointCare NOW test results. This was 39% using a 200 cells/µl threshold. Agreement with infant samples was higher, with 90% qualifying at a 25% eligibility threshold. CONCLUSION: The performance of the PointCare NOW instrument for absolute and percent CD4 enumeration was inadequate for HIV clinical management in adults. In children, the small sample size was not large enough to draw a conclusion. This study also highlights the importance of independent evaluation of new diagnostic technology platforms before deployment.

Effect of point-of-care CD4 cell count tests on retention of patients and rates of antiretroviral therapy initiation in primary health clinics: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Loss to follow-up of HIV-positive patients before initiation of antiretroviral therapy can exceed 50% in low-income settings and is a challenge to the scale-up of treatment. We implemented point-of-care counting of CD4 cells in Mozambique and assessed the effect on loss to follow-up before immunological staging and treatment initiation. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, data for enrolment into HIV management and initiation of antiretroviral therapy were extracted retrospectively from patients' records at four primary health clinics providing HIV treatment and point-of-care CD4 services. Loss to follow-up and the duration of each preparatory step before treatment initiation were measured and compared with baseline data from before the introduction of point-of-care CD4 testing. FINDINGS: After the introduction of point-of-care CD4 the proportion of patients lost to follow-up before completion of CD4 staging dropped from 57% (278 of 492) to 21% (92 of 437) (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0·2, 95% CI 0·15-0·27). Total loss to follow-up before initiation of antiretroviral treatment fell from 64% (314 of 492) to 33% (142 of 437) (OR 0·27, 95% CI 0·21-0·36) and the proportion of enrolled patients initiating antiretroviral therapy increased from 12% (57 of 492) to 22% (94 of 437) (OR 2·05, 95% CI 1·42-2·96). The median time from enrolment to antiretroviral therapy initiation reduced from 48 days to 20 days (p<0·0001), primarily because of a reduction in the median time taken to complete CD4 staging, which decreased from 32 days to 3 days (p<0·0001). Loss to follow-up between staging and antiretroviral therapy initiation did not change significantly (OR 0·84, 95% CI 0·49-1·45). INTERPRETATION: Point-of-care CD4 testing enabled clinics to stage patients rapidly on-site after enrolment, which reduced opportunities for pretreatment loss to follow-up. As a result, more patients were identified as eligible for and initiated antiretroviral treatment. Point-of-care testing might therefore be an effective intervention to reduce pretreatment loss to follow-up. FUNDING: Absolute Return for Kids and UNITAID.

Accurate CD4 T-cell enumeration and antiretroviral drug toxicity monitoring in primary healthcare clinics using point-of-care testing.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of point-of-care tests (POCTs) for CD4 cell, clinical chemistry and hemoglobin in primary healthcare clinics in Mozambique. DESIGN AND METHODS: POCT and laboratory-based assays were conducted on adult HIV-positive patients enrolled consecutively at primary healthcare clinics in Mozambique. Patients were tested on-site with POCT CD4 (Pima), clinical chemistry (Reflotron) and hemoglobin (HemoCue) devices using finger prick blood. Results obtained on paired blood samples were used for agreement analysis (bias and limits of agreement). Repeatability analysis was also performed for POCT CD4 cell counting. RESULTS: Primary health nurses operating the Pima, Reflotron and HemoCue POCT devices produced results with low levels of bias for CD4(+) T-cell counts (-52.8 cells/µl), alanine aminotransferase (-0.2 U/l), aspartate aminotransferase (-4.0 U/l) and hemoglobin (0.95 g/dl). CD4(+) T-cell counts in paired specimens of finger prick and venous blood tested on the POCT CD4 device were in close agreement (bias -9 cells/µl, coefficient of variation 10.6%). The repeatability of POCT CD4 cell counting was similar to that observed with laboratory instruments (bias -6.2 cells/µl, coefficient of variation 10.7% vs. bias -5.7 cells/µl, coefficient of variation 7.5%). CONCLUSION: Primary health clinic nurses generated accurate results for CD4(+) T-cell counts, liver enzymes and hemoglobin using simple POC devices on finger prick samples at decentralized antiretroviral therapy (ART) clinics. POC diagnostics to monitor ART at primary healthcare level is technically feasible and should be utilized in efforts to decentralize HIV care and treatment.