Laboratory Evaluation of the Validity of the Current HIV Testing Algorithm in Kenya
American Journal of Internal Medicine
Volume 3, Issue 1, January 2015, Pages: 23-27
Received: Jan. 30, 2015; Accepted: Feb. 9, 2015; Published: Feb. 15, 2015
Views 2848      Downloads 323
Authors
James Kimotho, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
Zipporah Ng’ang’a, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Thika, Kenya
Edna Nyairo, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
Missiani Ochwoto, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
Nicholas Nzioka, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
Francis Ogolla, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
Michael Kiptoo, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
Background: The HIV Lateral Flow Tests (LFTs) provide a good compromise between accuracy, cost, speed and overall effectiveness. Objective: This study assessed the laboratory performance of the LFTs in the current National HIV Testing Algorithm in Kenya. Methods: Four hundred blood samples, 145 HIV positives and 255 HIV negatives, were collected from the Regional Blood Transfusion Centers in Kenya. They were analyzed using five LFTs, three of which were in the HIV Testing Algorithm in Kenya. Samples were also tested using Vironostika™ Uni-Form II Ag/Ab ELISA as a Gold Standard. The decision on the HIV status of the samples was determined by consensus status of the five LFTs. Diagnostic sensitivity (D-SN), specificity (D-SP), Positive Predictive Value (PPV) and Negative Predictive Value (NPV) were then computed together with relative Analytical sensitivity each LFT. Results: The three LFTs in the HIV Testing Algorithm in Kenya (KHB Colloidal Gold, First Response™ 1-2.0 and Uni-Gold™ HIV test) showed a D-SN of 100% (95% CI: 97.4-100.0), 96.4% (95% CI: 91.8 - 98.8) and 100% (95% CI: 97.4-100.0) respectively in relation to the Consensus status with LFTs. However, Determine™ HIV-1/2 showed the highest Analytical sensitivity when compared with two other kits in HIV Testing Algorithm in Kenya and Aware™ HIV-1/2 BSP kit. Conclusion: Though the LFTs in the current HIV Testing Algorithm in Kenya show high performance profiles, Determine™ HIV-1/2 showed higher Analytical sensitivity profile than the two HIV Screening and confirmation test kits. There is a need of reconsidering the financial savings (of 10-16%) vis-ȃ-vis the possibilities of missing HIV positive cases in the current HIV Testing Algorithm in Kenya.
Keywords
Lateral Flow Tests, HIV, Testing Algorithm in Kenya, Sensitivity, Predictive Value, Specificity
To cite this article
James Kimotho, Zipporah Ng’ang’a, Edna Nyairo, Missiani Ochwoto, Nicholas Nzioka, Francis Ogolla, Michael Kiptoo, Laboratory Evaluation of the Validity of the Current HIV Testing Algorithm in Kenya, American Journal of Internal Medicine. Vol. 3, No. 1, 2015, pp. 23-27. doi: 10.11648/j.ajim.20150301.14
References
[1]
WHO-EMRO, Rapid HIV Tests: Guidelines for use in HIV testing and counseling services in resource-constrained setting. 2004.
[2]
Van Binsbergen, J.d.R., D.; Peels, H.; Dries, C.; Scherders, J.; Koolen, M. Zekeng, L. and Gürtler, L.G., Evaluation of a new third generation anti-HIV-1/anti-HIV-2 assay with increased sensitivity for HIV-1 group O. Journal of Virological Methods, 1996. 60(2): p. 131-7.
[3]
Wong, E., Y.; Indira, K. and Hewlett, 1, HIV Diagnostics: Challenges and Opportunities: Rapid & PoC Testing in RLS. HIV Therapy, 2010. 4(4): p. 399-412.
[4]
WHO, HIV assays operational characteristics: HIV rapid diagnostic tests (detection of HIV-1/2 antibodies). report 2013. 17.
[5]
National AIDS and STI Control Programme, M.o.P.H.a.S., Kenya, Guidelines for HIV Testing and Counselling in Kenya. NASCOP, 2008.
[6]
Plate, D.K., Evaluation and implementation of rapid HIV tests:the experience in 11 African countries. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses, 2007. 23: p. 1491–1498.
[7]
TDR, Evaluation of diagnostic tests for infectious diseases: general principles. 2010.
[8]
Ministry of Public Health and Sanitation, K., Circular No. MPHS/ADM/1/12 dated 6th February 2013
[9]
Madisa, M.C., S; Kgomotso, S.; Taurayi, T, Performance of Rapid HIV Testing by Lay Counsellors in the Field during the Behavioural and Biological Surveillance Survey among Female Sex Workers and Men who have Sex with Men in Botswana. Journal of acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes
[10]
Fabiani, M.N., B.; Biryahwaho, B.; Ouma, J.; Ninci, A.; Declich, S., Evaluating HIV testing algorithms for research, diagnosis and surveillance. health policy and development, 2005. 3(1).
[11]
Slev, P., The changing landscape of HIV diagnostics. Medical Laboratory Observer: Cover Story, 2012.
[12]
Lyer, P., Mwai, D., Ng'ang'a, A., Costing Kenya’s current and proposed HIV testing and Counseling Algorithms. Health Policy Project 2013.
[13]
Pebody, R., Large US study shows which HIV tests are most accurate; Antibody-only tests need to be replaced with combination tests; Antibody-only tests need to be replaced with combination tests. NAM AIDS MAP, 2014.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186