Journal Article > ReviewAbstract
Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 1 January 2014; Volume 12 (Issue 1); DOI:10.1586/14787210.2014.866516
Klarkowiski D, O'Brien DP, Shanks L, Singh KR
Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 1 January 2014; Volume 12 (Issue 1); DOI:10.1586/14787210.2014.866516
HIV rapid diagnostic tests have enabled widespread implementation of HIV programs in resource-limited settings. If the tests used in the diagnostic algorithm are susceptible to the same cause for false positivity, a false-positive diagnosis may result in devastating consequences. In resource-limited settings, the lack of routine confirmatory testing, compounded by incorrect interpretation of weak positive test lines and use of tie-breaker algorithms, can leave a false-positive diagnosis undetected. We propose that heightened CD5+ and early B-lymphocyte response polyclonal cross-reactivity are a major cause of HIV false positivity in certain settings; thus, test performance may vary significantly in different geographical areas and populations. There is an urgent need for policy makers to recognize that HIV rapid diagnostic tests are screening tests and mandate confirmatory testing before reporting an HIV-positive result. In addition, weak positive results should not be recognized as valid except in the screening of blood donors.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
PLOS One. 20 March 2013; Volume 8 (Issue 3); DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0059906
Shanks L, Klarkowiski D, O'Brien DP
PLOS One. 20 March 2013; Volume 8 (Issue 3); DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0059906
Access to HIV diagnosis is life-saving; however the use of rapid diagnostic tests in combination is vulnerable to wrongly diagnosing HIV infection when both screening tests give a false positive result. Misclassification of HIV patients can also occur due to poor quality control, administrative errors and lack of supervision and training of staff. Médecins Sans Frontières discovered in 2004 that HIV negative individuals were enrolled in some HIV programmes. This paper describes the result of an audit of three sites to review testing practices, implement improved testing algorithms and offer re-testing to clients enrolled in the HIV clinic.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
PLOS One. 25 November 2013; Volume 8 (Issue 11); e81656.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0081656
Klarkowiski D, Glass K, O'Brien DP, Lokuge K, Piriou E, et al.
PLOS One. 25 November 2013; Volume 8 (Issue 11); e81656.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0081656
BACKGROUND
Recent trends to earlier access to anti-retroviral treatment underline the importance of accurate HIV diagnosis. The WHO HIV testing strategy recommends the use of two or three rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) combined in an algorithm and assume a population is serologically stable over time. Yet RDTs are prone to cross reactivity which can lead to false positive or discordant results. This paper uses discordancy data from Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) programmes to test the hypothesis that the specificity of RDTs change over place and time.
METHODS
Data was drawn from all MSF test centres in 2007-8 using a parallel testing algorithm. A Bayesian approach was used to derive estimates of disease prevalence, and of test sensitivity and specificity using the software WinBUGS. A comparison of models with different levels of complexity was performed to assess the evidence for changes in test characteristics by location and over time.
RESULTS
106, 035 individuals were included from 51 centres in 10 countries using 7 different RDTs. Discordancy patterns were found to vary by location and time. Model fit statistics confirmed this, with improved fit to the data when test specificity and sensitivity were allowed to vary by centre and over time. Two examples show evidence of variation in specificity between different testing locations within a single country. Finally, within a single test centre, variation in specificity was seen over time with one test becoming more specific and the other less specific.
CONCLUSIONS
This analysis demonstrates the variable specificity of multiple HIV RDTs over geographic location and time. This variability suggests that cross reactivity is occurring and indicates a higher than previously appreciated risk of false positive HIV results using the current WHO testing guidelines. Given the significant consequences of false HIV diagnosis, we suggest that current testing and evaluation strategies be reviewed.
Recent trends to earlier access to anti-retroviral treatment underline the importance of accurate HIV diagnosis. The WHO HIV testing strategy recommends the use of two or three rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) combined in an algorithm and assume a population is serologically stable over time. Yet RDTs are prone to cross reactivity which can lead to false positive or discordant results. This paper uses discordancy data from Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) programmes to test the hypothesis that the specificity of RDTs change over place and time.
METHODS
Data was drawn from all MSF test centres in 2007-8 using a parallel testing algorithm. A Bayesian approach was used to derive estimates of disease prevalence, and of test sensitivity and specificity using the software WinBUGS. A comparison of models with different levels of complexity was performed to assess the evidence for changes in test characteristics by location and over time.
RESULTS
106, 035 individuals were included from 51 centres in 10 countries using 7 different RDTs. Discordancy patterns were found to vary by location and time. Model fit statistics confirmed this, with improved fit to the data when test specificity and sensitivity were allowed to vary by centre and over time. Two examples show evidence of variation in specificity between different testing locations within a single country. Finally, within a single test centre, variation in specificity was seen over time with one test becoming more specific and the other less specific.
CONCLUSIONS
This analysis demonstrates the variable specificity of multiple HIV RDTs over geographic location and time. This variability suggests that cross reactivity is occurring and indicates a higher than previously appreciated risk of false positive HIV results using the current WHO testing guidelines. Given the significant consequences of false HIV diagnosis, we suggest that current testing and evaluation strategies be reviewed.