Comparison of saliva and serum for HIV surveillance in developing countries

Abstract

Saliva has been proposed as a non-invasive alternative to serum for HIV antibody testing. In a field study in Myanmar (formerly Burma), we evaluated such an alternative to identify the frequency of HIV infection in a surveillance programme of high-risk and low-risk sentinel groups. Duplicate vials of saliva and serum were collected from 479 high-risk and 1039 low-risk subjects. One vial of each pair was analysed blind in two laboratories, one in the USA and the other in Myanmar. The US laboratory followed WHO confirmatory strategy III with three different enzymelinked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), while the laboratory in Myanmar followed strategy I with one ELISA. Serum testing in the US was the gold standard. The Cambridge ELISA with saliva was a more effective surveillance tool (sensitivity 90·5%, specificity 99·5-100%) for describing the frequency of subjects with HIV antibodies than the serum ELISA supplied to Myanmar by WHO (95·9% and 98·3%, respectively). Saliva is recommended as a safe and effective alternative to serum for HIV antibody testing with ELISA in surveillance programmes in developing countries.