Diagnostic reliability of Architect anti-HCV assay: Experience of a tertiary care hospital in India.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Anti-HCV assays are prone to false positive results. Thus, accurate detection of HCV infection is critical for the timely therapeutic management. This study ascertained the reliability of Architect anti-HCV assay (Abbott) and to estimate the agreement of this assay with Ortho HCV 3.0 ELISA Test System with Enhanced SAVe (Ortho), HCV Tri-dot (Tri-dot) and HCV-PCR in a tertiary care setting. METHODS: A total of 78 788 consecutive sera were routinely screened for anti-HCV antibodies using Architect. All repeatedly reactive anti-HCV sera (n=1000) and anti-HCV negative sera (n=300) were tested in Ortho and in Tri-dot assays. Representative proportions of sera (n=500) with various signal-to-cut-off (S/Co) ratio were also compared with HCV-PCR. RESULTS: When Architect was compared with Ortho, Tri-dot, and HCV-PCR, the level of agreement as assessed by kappa were .26, .16, and .27 respectively. Using Latent class analysis (LCA), we found that sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 36.1% for Architect, 93.8% and 100% for Ortho and 63.8% and 100% for Tri-dot respectively. The median S/CO ratio of Architect and Ortho anti-HCV assays were significantly different between HCV-PCR positive and negative results (P<.0001). Furthermore, Architect S/CO ratio of >8 showed higher accuracy indices in both anti-HCV assays. CONCLUSIONS: Architect can be used as a screening assay because of its high sensitivity, high throughput, and short turnaround time. However, S/Co ratios of ≥1 to <8 in Architect necessitates HCV PCR to identify current infection and or EIA to distinguish true positivity from false biological positivity.

Efficacy and safety of hepatitis C antiviral therapy in moderate and severe chronic kidney disease.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is an important cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Though indicated, antiviral therapy adds to the existing financial burden and is poorly tolerated in these patients. We studied HCV treatment outcomes in patients with moderate and severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) between June 2010 and June 2012. Out of 46 patients with CKD, only 16 (genotype 1:6, 3:9, indeterminate 1) received interferon treatment (conventional 9, pegylated 7; with low-dose ribavirin 5). End of treatment response was achieved in 50 % and sustained viral response in 44 %. Adverse effects such as tuberculosis, anemia, and cardiac failure resulting in discontinuation of therapy were seen in three. The dropout rate was 38 %. Though interferon therapy was efficacious and safe, it was received by only 35 % of patients with CKD. We suggest that antiviral therapy be offered under close monitoring in the absence of contraindications in patients with moderate and severe CKD.

Molecular epidemiology and genetic characterization of hepatitis B virus in the Indian subcontinent.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a gradually evolving virus. The aim of this study was to characterize the distribution pattern of HBV genotypes and subgenotypes and HBsAg subtypes in chronic hepatitis B subjects from the Indian subcontinent. We also sought to investigate the genetic diversity of HBV genotypes and its influence on the therapeutic response. METHODS: A total of 295 chronic hepatitis B subjects were studied. HBV genotypes and subgenotypes were determined using the generated HBV reverse transcriptase (rt) sequences. HBsAg subtypes were predicted using a newly developed automated program in Microsoft Visual Basic (VB6). Genetic diversity was characterized by calculating the mean genetic distance (d), the number of synonymous substitutions per synonymous site (dS), and the number of non-synonymous substitutions per non-synonymous site (dN). The virological response was measured by HBV DNA levels. RESULTS: In southern India, the predominant HBV subgenotype/subtype was D2/ayw3 (79.1%). In eastern India, C1/adr (28.2%) was found to be the predominant subgenotype/subtype, followed by A1/adw2 (25.4%). In the north-eastern region, C2/adr, D2/ayw3, and D5/ayw3 were predominant and were each identified in 20.8% of subjects. In treatment-naïve subjects, the d, dS, and dN of genotype D sequences were higher compared to genotypes C and A. Additionally, the d, dS, and dN of HBV rt sequence were higher in subjects who subsequently showed a virological response to nucleos(t)ide analogues as compared to non-responders, irrespective of the genotypes tested (p=0.014 to p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: We have described the distribution of HBV genotypes and subgenotypes and HBsAg subtypes in three major regions of the Indian subcontinent. HBV genetic diversity may play a pivotal role in the clinical outcome of chronic hepatitis B.

Performance characteristics and comparison of Abbott and artus real-time systems for hepatitis B virus DNA quantification.

Virological monitoring of hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA is critical to the management of HBV infection. With several HBV DNA quantification assays available, it is important to use the most efficient testing system for virological monitoring. In this study, we evaluated the performance characteristics and comparability of three HBV DNA quantification systems: Abbott HBV real-time PCR (Abbott PCR), artus HBV real-time PCR with QIAamp DNA blood kit purification (artus-DB), and artus HBV real-time PCR with the QIAamp DSP virus kit purification (artus-DSP). The lower limits of detection of these systems were established against the WHO international standards for HBV DNA and were found to be 1.43, 82, and 9 IU/ml, respectively. The intra-assay and interassay coefficients of variation of plasma samples (1 to 6 log(10) IU/ml) ranged between 0.05 to 8.34% and 0.16 to 3.48% for the Abbott PCR, 1.53 to 26.85% and 0.50 to 12.89% for artus-DB, and 0.29 to 7.42% and 0.94 to 3.01% for artus-DSP, respectively. Ninety HBV clinical samples were used for comparison of assays, and paired quantitative results showed strong correlation by linear regression analysis (artus-DB with Abbott PCR, r = 0.95; Abbott PCR with artus-DSP, r = 0.97; and artus-DSP with artus-DB, r = 0.94). Bland-Altman analysis showed a good level of agreement for Abbott PCR and artus-DSP, with a mean difference of 0.10 log(10) IU/ml and limits of agreement of -0.91 to 1.11 log(10) IU/ml. No genotype-specific bias was seen in all three systems for HBV genotypes A, C, and D, which are predominant in this region. This finding illustrates that the Abbott real-time HBV and artus-DSP systems show more comparable performance than the artus-DB system, meeting the current guidelines for assays to be used in the management of hepatitis B.