Comparative assessment of commercial ELISA kits for detection of HIV in India

BMC Research Notes

Malay Kumar Saha¹  Somesh Chandra Bhunia¹  Susmita Maity¹  Srijita Nandi¹ 

[1] National HIV Reference Laboratory, National Institute of Cholera and Enteric Diseases, Beliaghata, 700010 Kolkata, India

关键词: Seroconversion panel;    Sera panel;    Efficiency;    Specificity;    Sensitivity;    ELISA;    HIV;   

Others  :  1131977
DOI  :  10.1186/1756-0500-7-436

 received in 2013-07-31, accepted in 2014-07-01,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

India harbors the 3^rd highest HIV infected population globally. The magnitude of the HIV detection challenge is enormous. ELISA is the most commonly used screening technique for HIV. There is always an acute need for good quality ELISA kits. However, the quality evaluation data on Indian kits are very limited in comparison with internationally recognized kits. This study aimed to evaluate the performance and diagnostic usefulness of five commercially available ELISA kits which are frequently used in India.

Findings

The ELISA kits evaluated using an in-house well characterized 100 member sera panel revealed 100% sensitivity for all the batches. However, batch to batch variation in terms of specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and efficiency, although not statistically significant (p > 0.05), was observed. For specificity, the 3^rd generation kits (mean 99.6% to 99.3%) were comparatively better than the 4^th generation assays (97.2% to 96.9%). But the 4^th generation kits performed far better in the ability for early detection post HIV infection in the 25 member commercial seroconversion panel with a margin of at least 22 days and as high as 35 days than the 3^rd generation assays.

Conclusions

The commercial ELISA kits with 100% sensitivity seem appropriate for HIV screening. The ability of early detection post HIV infection favors use of 4^th generation kits for ensuring HIV free blood for transfusion. Lot to lot variations, especially kits having the specificity level ≤98.0%, indicate the need for a regular mechanism of kit evaluation for each batch for procuring kits appropriate for intended use.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Nandi et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS): UNAIDS World AIDS Day Report. Switzerland: UNAIDS; 2011.
• [2]Beelaert G, Vercauteren G, Fransen K, Mangelschots M, Rooy MD, Garcia-Ribas S, Groen G: Comparative evaluation of eight commercial enzyme linked immunosorbent assays and 14 simple assays for detection of antibodies to HIV. J Virol Methods 2002, 105:197-206.
• [3]Ribeiro RR, Da Silva LF, Cunha CB, Cabral VP, Dietze R: Performance characteristics of a raid new immunochromatographic test for detection of antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus. Clin Diag Lab Immunol 2003, 10:303-307.
• [4]Iqbal HS, Solomon S, Murugavel KG, Solomon SS, Balakrishnan P: Evaluation of two indigenous rapid and two ELISA assays for the diagnosis of HIV infection India. Indian J Medical Microbiol 2012, 30(4):397-402.
• [5]Crofts N, Maskill W, Gust ID: Evaluation of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays: a method of data analysis. J Virol Methods 1988, 22:51-59.
• [6]Weber B, Berger A, Rabenau H, Doerr HW: Evaluation of a new combined antigen and antibody human immunodeficiency virus screening assay, VIDAS HIV DUO Ultra. J Clin Microbiol 2002, 40:1420-1426.
• [7]Ly TD, Laperche S, Couroucé AM: Early detection of human immunodeficiency virus infection using third- and fourth-generation screening assays. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2001, 20:104-110.
• [8]Saville RD, Constantine NT, Cleghorn FR, Jack N, Bartholomew C, Edwards J, Gomez P, Blattner WA: Fourth-generation enzyme- linked immunosorbent assay for the simultaneous detection of human immunodeficiency virus antigen and antibody. J Clin Microbiol 2001, 39:2518-2524.
• [9]Maity S, Nandi S, Biswas S, Sadhukhan S, Saha MK: Performance and diagnostic Usefulness of commercially available enzyme linked immunosorbent assay and rapid kits for detection of HIV, HBV and HCV in India. Virol J 2012, 9:290.
• [10]Alvarez-Uria G: Factors associated with delayed entry into HIV medical care after HIV diagnosis in a resource-limited setting: Data from a cohort study in India. Peer J 2013, 1:e90. e90 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.90
• [11]National AIDS Control Organization (Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Govt of India): Manual on Quality Standard for HIV Testing Laboratories. New Delhi: NACO; 2007.
• [12]Iqbal HS, Solomon S, Murugavel KG, Solomon SS, Balakrishnan P: Evaluation and diagnostic usefulness of domeatic and imported enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for detection of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 antibody in India. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 2005, 12:1425-1428.
• [13]Matter L, Germann D: Detection of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 antibodies by new automated microparticle enzyme immunoassay for HIV type 1 and 2. J Clin Microbiol 1995, 33:2338-2341.
• [14]Pyra H, Boni J, Schupbach J: Ultrasensitive retrovirus detection by a reverse transcriptase assay based on product enhancement. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1994, 91:1544-1548.
• [15]National AIDS Control Organization (Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India): Technical Report India HIV Estimates. New Delhi: UNAIDS and NACO; 2012.
• [16]Ly TD, Martin L, Daghfal D, Sandridge A, West D, Bristow R, Laurence C, Qiu X, Lou SC, Hunt JC, Schochetman G, Devare SG: Seven Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) antigen-antibody combination assays: evaluation of HIV seroconversion sensitivity and subtype detection. J Clin Microbiol 2001, 39(9):3122.
• [17]Torane VP, Shastri JS: Comparison of ELISA and rapid screening tests for the diagnosis of HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C among healthy blood donors in a tertiary care hospital in Mumbai. Indian J Med Microbiol 2008, 26:284-285.
• [18]Perry KR, Ramskill S, Eglin RP, Barbara JA, Parry JV: Improvement in the performance of HIV screening kits. Transfus Med 2008, 18(4):228-240.
• [19]Barbara J, Ramskill S, Perry K, Parry J, Nightingale M: The National Blood Service (England) approach to evaluation of kits for detecting infectious agents. Transfus Med Rev 2007, 21(2):147-158.