Abstract

BackgroundRapid HIV assays are the mainstay of HIV testing globally. Delivery of effective biomedical HIV prevention strategies such as antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) requires periodic HIV testing. Because rapid tests have high (>95%) but imperfect specificity, they are expected to generate some false positive results.MethodsWe assessed the frequency of true and false positive rapid results in the Partners PrEP Study, a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of PrEP. HIV testing was performed monthly using 2 rapid tests done in parallel with HIV enzyme immunoassay (EIA) confirmation following all positive rapid tests.ResultsA total of 99,009 monthly HIV tests were performed; 98,743 (99.7%) were dual-rapid HIV negative. Of the 266 visits with ≥1 positive rapid result, 99 (37.2%) had confirmatory positive EIA results (true positives), 155 (58.3%) had negative EIA results (false positives), and 12 (4.5%) had discordant EIA results. In the active PrEP arms, over two-thirds of visits with positive rapid test results were false positive results (69.2%, 110 of 159), although false positive results occurred at <1% (110/65,945) of total visits.ConclusionsWhen HIV prevalence or incidence is low due to effective HIV prevention interventions, rapid HIV tests result in a high number of false relative to true positive results, although the absolute number of false results will be low. Program roll-out for effective interventions should plan for quality assurance of HIV testing, mechanisms for confirmatory HIV testing, and counseling strategies for persons with positive rapid test results.

Highlights

  • The use of antiretroviral-based approaches to HIV prevention, including antiretroviral treatment of HIV-infected partners of HIV-uninfected individuals [1], antiretroviral-based topical microbicides [2], and oral antiretrovirals as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) [3,4,5,6], has significant promise for reducing the scale of the HIV epidemic

  • Of the 266 visits with 1 positive rapid result, 99 (37.2%) had confirmatory positive enzyme immunoassay (EIA) results, 155 (58.3%) had negative EIA results, and PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone

  • When HIV prevalence or incidence is low due to effective HIV prevention interventions, rapid HIV tests result in a high number of false relative to true positive results, the absolute number of false results will be low

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The use of antiretroviral-based approaches to HIV prevention, including antiretroviral treatment of HIV-infected partners of HIV-uninfected individuals [1], antiretroviral-based topical microbicides [2], and oral antiretrovirals as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) [3,4,5,6], has significant promise for reducing the scale of the HIV epidemic. Implementation of these HIV prevention interventions will be accompanied by periodic HIV testing; for PrEP, testing is a critical step for continued usage of the intervention, since ongoing PrEP exposure with incident HIV infection may facilitate resistance. Because rapid tests have high (>95%) but imperfect specificity, they are expected to generate some false positive results

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call