Risks of requiring a dedicated molecular specimen for HIV diagnosis and a potential strategy for mitigation.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:HIV screening (i.e. antigen/antibody) tests are followed by a supplemental (i.e. antibody-only) if the screen is positive. Discrepant results can result from two scenarios: a false-positive screening test or acute HIV infection. These scenarios can be distinguished by a molecular HIV test, but due to contamination concerns, our laboratory recently implemented a policy requiring a second specimen dedicated for molecular HIV testing. Our objective was to (1) characterize the effect of this policy on the time-to-diagnosis for patients with discrepant screening and supplemental test results, and (2) explore "strength of positivity" as an interim predictor of screening test accuracy while awaiting confirmatory test results. METHODS:Data from our laboratory information system, electronic health record, and instrument logs were used to collate data for all HIV testing performed at Barnes-Jewish Hospital (BJH) between January 1, 2014 and October 18, 2017. RESULTS:Requiring a dedicated specimen for molecular testing significantly increased the time-to-diagnosis for patients with discrepant screening and supplemental HIV tests (p = 0.0084). This policy also contributed to loss-to-followup, with 0/35 discrepant cases lost-to-followup prior to policy implementation compared to 2/10 after implementation. However, by optimizing the signal-to-cutoff (S/CO) ratio of the screening test, we were able to more accurately distinguish false-positives from acute-HIV prior to molecular testing (sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 89%). CONCLUSIONS:We propose utilizing quantitative fourth-generation assay results (S/CO) ratios as a predictor of infection true positivity in situations where the screening assay is reactive but the supplemental test is negative and confirmatory molecular results are not immediately available.