ABSTRACT
Rapid tests allow outpatient, low cost, reliable, screening for chronic HIV infection. However, data regarding their sensitivity on primary infection remain scarce. The objective of this study was to assess sensitivity of nine HIV rapid tests for primary HIV-1 infection screening. Seventy-five serum samples from patients during HIV-1 primary infection were included. Primary infection was diagnosed by a positive 4th generation ELISA and HIV-1 RNA positivity confirmed by Western blot patterns associated with HIV-1 primary infection. Early seroconversion was defined as the absence of antibodies on HIV-1 Western blot associated with HIV-1 RNA and p24-antigen positivity. An identical sensitivity (95% CI) of 76.7% (65.2-84.2%) was observed for HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK® Assay (STAT-PAK), INSTI™ HIV-1/HIV-2 antibody Test (INSTI), SURE CHECK® HIV 1/2 (SURE CHECK) and MULTISURE HIV rapid test (MULTISURE) with visual reading. Sensitivity was 74.7% (63.8-83.1%) for MULTISURE (automatic reading), 77.0% (66.3-85.1%) for FIRST RESPONSE® Test VIH 1-2.O CARTE (FIRST RESPONSE), 83.8% (73.8-90.5%) for VIKIA HIV1/2® (VIKIA), 88.0% (78.7-93.6%) for Genie™ Fast HIV 1/2 (Genie Fast), 88.6% (79.0-94.1%) for Hexagon HIV (Hexagon), and 92.8% (83.6-96.3%) for Exacto® TEST HIV Pro (Exacto). However, rapid tests performed poorly for the early seroconversion subgroup (n = 14), with sensitivities ranging from 7% (1.3-31.5%) for STAT-PAK, INSTI, SURE CHECK, MULTISURE (automatic reading), to 29% (12-55%) for FIRST RESPONSE, 31% (13-58%) for VIKIA, 43% (21-67%) for Hexagon and 57.1% (32.6-78.6%) for Exacto and Genie Fast. Overall, despite significant discrepancies in sensitivity, HIV rapid tests should be used with caution in the context of a suspected primary infection.
Subject(s)
HIV Antibodies , HIV Infections , HIV-1 , Mass Screening , Sensitivity and Specificity , Humans , HIV Infections/diagnosis , HIV-1/immunology , HIV-1/isolation & purification , Male , Mass Screening/methods , Female , Adult , HIV Antibodies/blood , Middle Aged , RNA, Viral/blood , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/methods , Young Adult , Blotting, Western/methods , Diagnostic Tests, Routine/methods , HIV Testing/methodsABSTRACT
Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) involves measuring and interpreting drug concentrations in biological fluids to adjust drug dosages. In onco-hematology, TDM guidelines for oral molecular targeted therapies (oMTTs) are varied. This study evaluates a quantitative approach with a score to predict the clinical usefulness of TDM for oMTTs. We identified key parameters for an oMTT's suitability for TDM from standard TDM recommendations. We gathered oMTT pharmacological data, which covered exposure variability (considering pharmacokinetic (PK) impact of food and proton pump inhibitors), technical intricacy (PK linearity and active metabolites), efficacy (exposure-response relationship), and safety (maximum tolerated dose, and exposure-safety relationship). To assess the validity and the relevance of the score and define relevant thresholds, we evaluated molecules with prospective validation or strong recommendations for TDM, both in oncology and in other fields. By September 1, 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved 67 oMTTs for onco-hematological indications. Scores ranged from 15 (acalabrutinib) to 80 (sunitinib) with an average of 48.3 and a standard deviation of 15.6. Top scorers included sunitinib, sorafenib, cabozantinib, nilotinib, and abemaciclib. Based on scores, drugs were categorized into low (< 40), intermediate (≥ 40 and < 60), and high (≥ 60) relevance for TDM. Notably, negative controls generally scored around or under 40, whereas positive controls had a high score across different indications. In this work, we propose a quantitative and reproducible score to compare the potential usefulness of TDM for oMTTs. Future guidelines should prioritize the TDM for molecules with the highest score.