Comparison of NucliSens and Roche Monitor assays for quantitation of levels of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA in plasma.

We compared the performance of Organon Teknika's NucliSens and Roche Diagnostic Systems' Monitor quantitative human immunodeficiency type 1 RNA assays. Both had similar linearity and sensitivity over most of the dynamic range of the assays, although the Monitor assay was superior at the low range of RNA values while the NucliSens assay was more consistent at higher RNA values. NucliSens generally showed less interassay variability.

Comparison of Roche MONITOR and Organon Teknika NucliSens assays to quantify human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA in cerebrospinal fluid.

We compared Roche MONITOR and Organon Teknika NucliSens assays for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Results of 282 assays were highly correlated (r = 0.826), with MONITOR values being 0.29 +/- 0.4 log(10) copies/ml (mean +/- standard deviation) values. Both assays can reliably quantify HIV-1 RNA in CSF.

Multicenter evaluation of methods to quantitate human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA in seminal plasma.

We have evaluated two commercially available kits (AMPLICOR MONITOR [Roche] and NASBA HIV-1 QT or NucliSens HIV-1 QT [Organon Teknika]) and two noncommercial methods for the accurate quantitation of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA in seminal plasma. The same panels of coded specimens were tested on four separate occasions. Laboratories using the commercial assays employed silica beads to isolate HIV-1 RNA, which removed inhibitory factors sometimes found in seminal plasma. Sensitivities and specificities, respectively, for each assay were as follows: AMPLICOR MONITOR, 100 and 73%; NASBA HIV-1 QT, 84 and 100%; NucliSens HIV-1 QT, 99 and 98%; and noncommercial assays, 91 and 73%. When results from the laboratory that was inexperienced with the silica bead extraction method were excluded from the analysis, specificity for the Roche assay increased to 100%. The commercial assays demonstrated highly reproducible results, with intra-assay standard deviations (measured in log(10) RNA copies/milliliter of seminal plasma) ranging from 0.11 to 0.32; those of the noncommercial assays ranged from 0.12 to 0.75. Differences in mean estimated HIV-1 RNA concentrations were

Quantitation of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA in different biological compartments.

Little information is available describing viral loads in body fluids other than blood. In addition, the suitability of commercially available assays for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA quantitation has not been evaluated in most nonblood fluids. We compared Organon Teknika's nucleic acid sequence-based amplification method (NASBA) and Roche's Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor (reverse transcriptase PCR [RT-PCR]) for quantitating HIV-1 RNA in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), saliva, breast milk, seminal plasma, and cervical-vaginal lavage fluid (CVL). Saliva and breast milk frequently demonstrated some inhibition in the RT-PCR assay, similar to the inhibition previously described in seminal plasma. Inhibition of the RT-PCR assay was not observed with CSF or CVL, nor in any of the NASBA assays. When fluids from HIV-infected individuals were tested by RT-PCR and NASBA, 73 and 27% of CSF samples and 60 and 40% of breast milk specimens had detectable RNA, respectively. These differences were not statistically significant. In cross-sectional studies using RT-PCR to measure viral RNA in paired blood plasma and CSF samples, 71% of blood plasma samples and 42% of CSF samples were positive. A similar analysis using NASBA with paired blood plasma and CVL, saliva, or seminal plasma samples revealed 91% were blood plasma positive and 55% were CVL positive, 76% were blood plasma positive and 46% were saliva positive, and 83% were blood plasma positive and 63% were seminal plasma positive. NASBA worked fairly well to quantitate HIV-1 RNA from all fluids without apparent inhibition. RT-PCR performed well on CVL and CSF, frequently with greater sensitivity, although its use in other fluids appears limited due to the presence of inhibitors. These studies demonstrate that viral loads in nonblood fluids were generally lower than in blood.