ABSTRACT
Comparison of diagnostic accuracy for commercial hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotyping (Abbott RealTime HCV Genotyping II, Roche Cobas Genotyping) and investigational Abbott HCV Genotype plus RUO assays designed to discriminate genotype (GT)-1a, 1b or 6 in cases of ambiguous GT from the Abbott commercial assay remains limited. 743 HCV-viremic samples were subjected to analysis using Abbott and Roche commercial as well as Abbott HCV Genotype plus RUO assays. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) targeting core region was employed as the reference standard. Diagnostic accuracy was reported as the number of participants (percentages) along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Using NGS, 741 samples (99.7%) yielded valid genotyping results. The diagnostic accuracies were 97.6% (95% CI: 96.1%-98.5%) and 95.3% (95% CI: 93.4%-96.6%) using Abbott and Roche commercial assays (p = 0.0174). Abbott commercial assay accurately diagnosed HCV GT-6a and 6w, whereas Roche commercial assay accurately diagnosed HCV GT-6a. Both assays demonstrated low accuracies for HCV GT-6b, 6e, 6g, and 6n. Abbott HCV Genotype plus RUO assay discriminated 13 of the 14 samples (92.9%; 95% CI: 64.2%-99.6%) that yielded ambiguous GT. Both assays were capable of diagnosing mixed HCV infections when the minor genotype comprised >8.4% of the viral load. The diagnostic performance of commercial HCV genotyping assays is commendable. Abbott assay demonstrated superior performance compared to Roche assay in diagnosing HCV GT-6. Abbott HCV Genotype plus RUO assay aids in discriminating ambiguous GT. Both commercial assays are proficient in diagnosing mixed HCV infections at a cut-off viral load of 8.4% in minor genotype.
