Impact of the 2014 CDC HIV testing guidelines on detection of acute HIV infections.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued updated guidelines for HIV testing in 2014. These guidelines recommend screening using an HIV-1/2 antigen/antibody (Ag/Ab) test and create the ability to identify algorithm-defined acute HIV infections (AHI). The guidelines also recommend laboratory confirmation of preliminary positive point of care (POC) rapid HIV test results and specimens from high-risk individuals who test POC rapid negative. The Florida Public Health Laboratory (FPHL) switched from an antibody-only algorithm to the CDC recommended algorithm April 16, 2012. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the FPHL HIV testing data and evaluate the impact of the CDC recommended algorithm on the identification of AHI, time to result and inconclusive HIV reports. STUDY DESIGN: FPHL HIV test data, for the period January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2019, was reviewed to determine the number of AHI cases identified, the number of indeterminate HIV results and the time from specimen receipt to result for tests in the antibody-only and CDC recommended algorithms. In addition, POC rapid results were compared to laboratory-based results for AHI cases for which rapid test results were available. RESULTS: There was no difference in time to result between the antibody-only and CDC recommended algorithms for HIV negative specimens. The time to result for HIV-1 positive specimens decreased from an average of 5 days with the antibody-only algorithm to an average of 1 day with the CDC recommended algorithm. The average number of indeterminate results per month decreased from 6.25 per month with the antibody-only algorithm to an average of 2.5 per month using the CDC recommended algorithm. Despite HIV seropositivity decreasing by 0.5% during the study period (2012 = 3.1% [3,892/124,394]: 2019 = 2.6% [2,456/95,525]), AHI cases increased annually from a total of 4 in 2012 to over 50 in 2019 and cases were identified in 30 of 67 Florida counties. The increase in identification of AHIs is credited to educational efforts with healthcare providers to encourage further testing on individuals with risk factors for HIV and a recent POC HIV-1/2 rapid negative test result. CONCLUSIONS: Data indicates that performing HIV testing according to the CDC recommended algorithm decreased time to result for HIV positive results, reduced the number of indeterminate results and identified algorithm-defined AHI. In addition, laboratory-based testing is warranted for high-risk individuals who test negative by POC rapid testing.

Comparative Performance of the Reverse Algorithm Using Architect Syphilis TP Versus the Traditional Algorithm Using Rapid Plasma Reagin in Florida's Public Health Testing Population.

In Florida, where syphilis is a reportable disease, the number of primary and secondary (P&S) syphilis cases has increased from 3,266 in 2008-2010 to 5,340 in 2013-2015, a 63% increase. The objective of this study was to compare the performance and sensitivity of the syphilis reverse algorithm with the traditional algorithm for detecting P&S (infectious) syphilis cases. Clinical specimens from individuals who self-referred for syphilis testing at public health clinics were processed using the traditional algorithm (non-treponemal rapid plasma reagin (RPR) test followed by a confirmatory treponemal (EIA) test) and then further tested with the Architect Syphilis TP (ASTP) immunoassay (Abbott Diagnostics, Chicago, IL, USA) or by RPR confirmation, if needed (reverse algorithm). Of 1,079 specimens, 59 were positive for syphilis. The sensitivity of the reverse algorithm was 98.3% (58/59) and of the traditional algorithm was 72.9% (43/59). Based on clinical evidence, of the 16 traditional algorithm-negative but reverse algorithm-positive cases, 68.8% (11/16) were classified as missed P&S infections (treatment naïve) and 31.2% (5/16) were classified as missed past syphilis (latent or infections with documented linkage to care). The reverse algorithm enables the detection of additional P&S syphilis cases missed by our current traditional algorithm.

Comparative performance of the Geenius™ HIV-1/HIV-2 supplemental test in Florida's public health testing population.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published updated guidelines in 2014 for the laboratory diagnosis of HIV in the United States, which recommend use of a supplemental immunoassay (IA) that differentiates HIV-1 from HIV-2 after a repeatedly reactive HIV-1/2 antigen/antibody "Combo" screening test. In October 2014, Bio-Rad Laboratories introduced the FDA-cleared Geenius HIV-1/HIV-2 Supplemental assay and in July 2016, it replaced the Multispot HIV-1/HIV-2 differentiation rapid test as the second test in the HIV diagnostic algorithm. OBJECTIVE: To compare performance of the new FDA-cleared Bio-Rad Geenius HIV-1/HIV-2 Supplemental assay and the Bio-Rad Multispot HIV-1/HIV-2 differentiation assay for use as the primary supplemental test in the 2014 CDC/APHL HIV Diagnostic Algorithm. STUDY DESIGN: Two sets of specimens were used to assess the performance of Geenius; 340 select retrospective specimens, obtained through routine clinical submissions from individuals seeking HIV serostatus determinations and 10 known HIV-2 antibody reactive specimens provided by Bio-Rad Laboratories. Panels were created and characterized solely by in-house laboratory results. The panels consisted of: algorithm-defined "established HIV-1 infections" (n=250), "acute HIV-1 infections" (n=20), "early HIV-1 infections" (n=10) and "false positive Combo specimens" (n=60). RESULTS: CONCLUSIONS: The Geenius assay provides significant advantages over Multispot as an appropriate replacement for the primary supplemental test in the HIV Diagnostic Algorithm. In this retrospective study, Geenius was highly concordant with Multispot, reclassified some acute and early algorithm-defined HIV-1 positive specimens and demonstrated a potential decrease in the number HIV-1 RNA nucleic acid amplification tests needed to complete the diagnostic algorithm.

Costs and outcomes of laboratory diagnostic algorithms for the detection of HIV.

BACKGROUND: An alternative HIV testing algorithm, designed to improve the detection of acute and early infections and differentiate between HIV-1 and HIV-2 antibodies, has been developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Association of Public Health Laboratories. While it promises greater sensitivity, it also raises concerns about costs. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the most commonly used algorithm which was developed in 1989, a third-generation (3G) immunoassay (IA) and Western blot confirmatory test, to a newer algorithm. The new algorithm includes either a 3G or a fourth-generation (4G) initial IA, followed by confirmatory testing with a HIV-1/HIV-2 differentiation IA and, if needed, a nucleic acid amplification test (NAT). STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an analysis of HIV testing costs from the perspective of the laboratory, and classified costs according to IA testing volume. We developed a decision analytic model, populated with cost data from 17 laboratories and published assay performance data, to compare the cost-effectiveness of the testing algorithms for a cohort of 30,000 specimens with a 1% HIV prevalence and 0.1% acute HIV infection prevalence. RESULTS: Costs were lower in high-volume laboratories regardless of testing algorithm. For specimens confirmed positive for HIV antibody, the alternative algorithm (IA, Multispot) was less costly than the current algorithm (IA, WB); however, there was wide variation in reported testing costs. For our cohort, the alternative algorithm initiated with a 3G IA and 4G IA identified 15 and 25 more HIV infections, respectively, than the 1989 algorithm. In medium-volume laboratories, the 1989 algorithm was more costly and less effective than the alternative algorithm with a 3G IA; in high-volume laboratories, the alternative algorithm with 3G IA costs $162 more per infection detected. The alternative algorithm with 4G instead of 3G incurred an additional cost of $14,400 and $4865 in medium- and high-volume labs, respectively. DISCUSSION: HIV testing costs varied with IA testing volumes. The additional cost of 4G over 3G IA might be justified by the additional cases of HIV detected and transmissions averted due to earlier detection. CONCLUSION: The alternative HIV testing algorithm compares favorably to the 1989 algorithm in terms of cost and effectiveness.

Performance of the new HIV-1/2 diagnostic algorithm in Florida's public health testing population: a review of the first five months of utilization.

OBJECTIVE: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Association of Public Health Laboratories have proposed a new HIV-1/2 Diagnostic Algorithm: a fourth-generation HIV-1/2 Ag/Ab immunoassay (IA) followed, when repeatedly reactive, by an HIV-1/HIV-2 antibody differentiation test, and if that is non-reactive, HIV-1 nucleic acid amplification testing (NAT). The objective of the study was to evaluate performance of the new algorithm after five months of utilization in our high volume, high HIV-1 seroprevalence public health population. METHODS: Algorithm sensitivity and specificity was evaluated on 51,953 prospective serum or plasma specimens from individuals self-referring for HIV serostatus determination. Specimens were tested on the day of receipt or maintained at 4°C until the next testing opportunity. If the initial HIV-1/2 Ag/Ab IA (Abbott Combo) was nonreactive, a negative lab interpretation report would follow. If the initial IA was reactive, repeat screening in duplicate was immediately performed. Repeatedly reactive specimens were tested with an HIV-1/HIV-2 differentiation assay (Multispot [MS] HIV-1/HIV-2 Rapid Test) on the same or next workday. If the Abbott Combo-MS assays were discordant, HIV-1 NAT (APTIMA(®) HIV-1 RNA) was performed. In addition to the algorithm performance, we also evaluated the laboratory "specimen receipt to reporting" turnaround time (TAT). RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of the new HIV Diagnostic Algorithm with serum and plasma specimens over the initial 5 month period was 100% (922/922) and 99.99% (51,030/51,031), respectively. Two algorithm-defined acute HIV-1 infections (AHI) were detected. In addition only 3 of the 992 MS secondary tests performed were interpreted as HIV-1 Indeterminate (HIV-1 recombinant gp41 reactivity only). Of these, 2 were HIV-1 NAT reactive, defined in-house as an early HIV infection (EHI) and one was HIV-1 NAT nonreactive, indicating a false positive initial screening result. Laboratory TAT for reporting concordant reactive Abbott Combo-MS results in ≤ 2 workdays was 96%, compared to 22% for reporting concordant reactive 3rd generation IA-Western blot results. CONCLUSIONS: In our public health testing population, results from the new HIV Diagnostic Algorithm exceeded those of the 3rd generation IA-WB algorithm with respect to HIV-1 sensitivity. The identification of two algorithm-defined AHIs provided the opportunity to inform these individuals of their HIV status and link them to medical care earlier than the scheduled posttest counseling appointment.

HIV single staging algorithm: integration and maximization of resources by reducing time between HIV diagnosis and treatment.

BACKGROUND: Early HIV diagnosis, linkage and engagement into care are vital to improved personal health outcomes. The initiation of antiretroviral therapy, with retention in care and drug adherence leads to viral load suppression, a significant decrease in HIV transmission rates and ultimately a reduction in HIV incidence rates. In the U.S only 51% of those diagnosed with HIV infection are retained in care and 28% have a suppressed viral load. Reducing the time and number of visits from HIV diagnosis to entry into care, has the potential to engage and treat an increased number of infected individuals. OBJECTIVE: (1) Evaluate the feasibility of conducting HIV-1 supplemental testing concurrently with baseline clinical management testing; (2) to evaluate whether all tests could be completed and reported prior to the traditional posttest counseling appointment; (3) to monitor the return activity for posttest and medical provider appointments. METHODS: Baseline CD4 and HIV-1 viral load tests were performed concurrently with an HIV-1/2 antibody immunoassay (IA) and HIV-1 Western blot (WB) on 105 individuals with preliminary positive rapid test results. Participating study-sites were located in high-risk, high-morbidity locations: a county jail, a county mobile unit and a county hospital emergency department. Based on the individual's self-reporting statement of "No" to a previous HIV diagnosis and the POC preliminary positive rapid test result, blood specimens were processed via the Single Staging Algorithm. Study site data and medical record review established time intervals between the rapid test and subsequent visits. RESULTS: Of the 105 individuals with HIV-1 preliminary positive rapid test results, 102 were confirmed positive with HIV-1 WB (plus 3rd generation IA repeatedly reactive) and one was confirmed by an HIV-1 WB indeterminate (gp160), HIV-1 Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT) reactive (an algorithm-defined early infection). The concordance between POC preliminary positive rapid tests and the confirmatory test of the single staging algorithm was 98%. Ninety-six (91%) HIV-1 baseline viral load test results and 82 (78%) CD4/CD8 absolute counts were performed and made available to the provider prior to posttest counseling. The average number of visits for posttest counseling at 14 days was 44.7% (range 37.9-56.5%) with an additional 31.1% (range 22.7-37.9%) returning within 30 days. The average number of clients that returned for the medical provider appointment was 55.4%. CONCLUSION: A high percentage of HIV-1 clinical management baseline results (78-91%) and 100% confirmatory diagnostic results were completed and reported prior to the traditional posttest counseling appointment. Additional data and analysis is needed to determine the impact of the Single Staging Algorithm on medical provider appointments if the posttest appointment is more than 30 days after the preliminary HIV diagnosis.

Use of rapid HIV assays as supplemental tests in specimens with repeatedly reactive screening immunoassay results not confirmed by HIV-1 Western blot.

BACKGROUND: An alternate HIV testing algorithm has been proposed which includes a fourth-generation immunoassay followed by an HIV-1/HIV-2 antibody differentiation supplemental test for reactive specimens and a nucleic acid test (NAT) for specimens with discordant results. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of five rapid tests (Alere Clearview, Bio-Rad Multispot, OraSure OraQuick, MedMira Reveal, and Trinity Biotech Unigold) as the supplemental antibody assay in the algorithm. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 3273 serum and plasma specimens that were third-generation immunoassay repeatedly reactive and Western blot (WB) negative or indeterminate were tested with rapid tests and NAT. Specimens were classified by NAT: (1) HIV-1 infected (NAT-reactive; n=184, 5.6%), (2) HIV-status unknown (NAT nonreactive; n=3078, 94.2%) or by Multispot, (3) HIV-2 positive (n=5), and (4) HIV-1 and HIV-2 positive (n=6). Excluding HIV-2 positive specimens, we calculated the proportion of reactive rapid tests among specimens with reactive and nonreactive NAT. RESULTS: The proportion of infected specimens with reactive rapid test results and negative or indeterminate WB ranged from 30.4% (56) to 47.8% (88) depending on the rapid test. From 1% to 2% of NAT-negative specimens had reactive rapid test results. CONCLUSIONS: In these diagnostically challenging specimens, all rapid tests identified infections that were missed by the Western blot, but only Multispot could differentiate HIV-1 from HIV-2. Regardless of which rapid test is used as a supplemental test in the alternative algorithm, false-positive algorithm results (i.e., reactive screening and rapid test in uninfected person) may occur, which will need to be resolved during the baseline medical evaluation.

Rapid HIV screening: missed opportunities for HIV diagnosis and prevention.

BACKGROUND: Although rapid HIV tests increase the number of persons who are aware of their HIV status, they may fail to detect early HIV infection. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the sensitivity for early HIV infection of several rapid tests and third- and fourth-generation assays compared with nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT). STUDY DESIGN: Sensitivity for early HIV infection was evaluated using 62 NAAT-positive/WB-negative or indeterminate specimens from the CDC Acute HIV Infection study. Specimens underwent third-generation testing with Genetic Systems 1/2+O(®) and rapid testing with Multispot HIV-1/HIV-2. A subset was also tested with four FDA-approved rapid tests and Determine HIV-1 Antigen/Antibody Rapid Test(®) and Architect HIV Antigen/Antibody Combo(®), both fourth-generation tests. RESULTS: Of 99,111 specimens screened from April 2006 to March 2008, 62 met the definition for early HIV infection (60 NAAT-positive/seronegative and 2 NAAT-positive/Western blot indeterminate). Third-generation testing correctly detected antibody in 34 specimens (55%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 42-67); Multispot detected antibody in 16 (26%; 95% CI: 16-38). Of the 62 specimens, 33 (53%) had sufficient quantity for further testing. Rapid test sensitivities for early HIV infection ranged from 22-33% compared with 55-57% for the third-generation assay and 76-88% for the fourth-generation tests. CONCLUSIONS: Many rapid HIV tests failed to detect half of the early HIV infection cases in whom antibody was present. Programs that screen high-incidence populations with rapid tests should consider supplemental testing with NAAT or other antigen-based tests. These data support the need for more sensitive antigen-based point-of-care screening tests for early HIV infection.

Cost-effectiveness of pooled nucleic acid amplification testing for acute HIV infection after third-generation HIV antibody screening and rapid testing in the United States: a comparison of three public health settings.

BACKGROUND: Detection of acute HIV infection (AHI) with pooled nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) following HIV testing is feasible. However, cost-effectiveness analyses to guide policy around AHI screening are lacking; particularly after more sensitive third-generation antibody screening and rapid testing. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of pooled NAAT screening that assessed the prevention benefits of identification and notification of persons with AHI and cases averted compared with repeat antibody testing at different intervals. Effectiveness data were derived from a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention AHI study conducted in three settings: municipal sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinics, a community clinic serving a population of men who have sex with men, and HIV counseling and testing sites. Our analysis included a micro-costing study of NAAT and a mathematical model of HIV transmission. Cost-effectiveness ratios are reported as costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained in US dollars from the societal perspective. Sensitivity analyses were conducted on key variables, including AHI positivity rates, antibody testing frequency, symptomatic detection of AHI, and costs. Pooled NAAT for AHI screening following annual antibody testing had cost-effectiveness ratios exceeding US$200,000 per QALY gained for the municipal STD clinics and HIV counseling and testing sites and was cost saving for the community clinic. Cost-effectiveness ratios increased substantially if the antibody testing interval decreased to every 6 months and decreased to cost-saving if the testing interval increased to every 5 years. NAAT was cost saving in the community clinic in all situations. Results were particularly sensitive to AHI screening yield. CONCLUSIONS: Pooled NAAT screening for AHI following negative third-generation antibody or rapid tests is not cost-effective at recommended antibody testing intervals for high-risk persons except in very high-incidence settings.

Performance of the Aptima HIV-1 RNA qualitative assay with 16- and 32-member specimen pools.

The Aptima HIV-1 RNA qualitative assay tested with a WHO-approved HIV type 1 RNA standard in 16- and 32-member pools detected 100% of the pools (1,070 and 2,130 HIV-1 RNA copies/ml/pool, respectively), thus exceeding the FDA-required lower limit of detection. The Aptima test can be used to screen for acute-phase HIV infection.

Detecting acute human immunodeficiency virus infection using 3 different screening immunoassays and nucleic acid amplification testing for human immunodeficiency virus RNA, 2006-2008.

BACKGROUND: The yield of nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) after routine screening for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antibody to detect acute HIV infection (AHI) may vary with different HIV-antibody assays. METHODS: From April 24, 2006, through March 28, 2008, patients underwent routine HIV-antibody screening using a first-generation assay at 14 county sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinics and 1 community clinic serving homosexual patients in Los Angeles; using a second-generation rapid test at 3 municipal STD clinics in New York; and using a third-generation assay at 80 public health clinics in Florida. To identify AHI, seronegative specimens were pooled for NAAT, followed by individual NAAT of specimens with positive findings. All AHI samples screened by first- and second-generation assays also underwent third-generation testing. RESULTS: We screened 37 012 persons using NAAT after first-generation testing; 35 AHIs were identified, increasing HIV case detection by 8.2%. After a second-generation rapid test, 6547 persons underwent NAAT; 7 AHIs were identified, increasing HIV case detection by 24.1%. After third-generation testing, 54 948 persons underwent NAAT; 12 AHI cases were identified, increasing HIV case detection by 1.4%. Overall, pooled NAAT after negative third-generation test results detected 26 AHI cases, increasing HIV case detection by 2.2%. Most of the AHI cases from Los Angeles (26 of 35 [74%]) were identified at the community clinic where NAAT after third-generation testing increased HIV case detection by 11.9%. CONCLUSIONS: Pooled NAAT after third-generation testing increases HIV case detection, especially in venues of high HIV seropositivity. Therefore, targeted AHI screening using pooled NAAT after third-generation testing may be most effective, warranting a cost-benefit analysis.