ABSTRACT
The efficacy of antiretroviral (ARV) therapy can be compromised by the emergence and transmission of HIV-1 drug-resistant strains. HIV-1 drug-resistance (DR) genotypic testing thus plays an important role in the selection of optimal treatment regimens for HIV-infected individuals. Given the complexities of the testing procedures and the variety of approaches used, there is considerable potential for results to vary between laboratories. In Thailand, the national External Quality Assessment (EQA) scheme assesses the DR genotype testing performance of laboratories. Here, we evaluated the performance of laboratories in nucleotide sequencing and compared drug-resistance-associated mutations (DRMs) in the HIV-1 protease (PR) and reverse transcriptase (RT) genes during 2010-2015. The EQA samples in the 12 panels showed predominance for the CRF01_AE (85%) and subtype B (15%). Fourteen laboratory datasets were generated: eight using TruGene (TG), two using ViroSeq (VS), and four using in-house (IH) assays. All IH and VS laboratories had penalty scores <7, whereas five of the eight TG laboratories had fluctuating penalty scores. Moreover, seven and six TG laboratories could not amplify the two identical samples, 10B and 10E samples, or the CRF01_AE. Our findings demonstrate the requirement for laboratory participation in the ongoing EQA program and the optimization of kit assays using CRF01_AE samples. Our results also indicate that one advantage of participation is that the laboratories can monitor and investigate the source of laboratory errors.
