Evaluation of the HIV-1 Rapid Recency Assay and Limiting Antigen Avidity Enzyme Immunoassay for HIV Infection Status Interpretation in Long-Term Diagnosed Individuals in Thailand

<b>Background/Objectives:</b> Accurate surveillance of recent HIV infections is crucial for effective epidemic control and timely intervention. The Limited Antigen Avidity Enzyme Immunoassay (LAg-EIA) allows precise differentiation between recent and long-term HIV infections. To enhance accessibility, it has been developted into a point-of-care test, the Asanté™ HIV-1 Rapid Recency<sup>®</sup> Assay (ARRA), a rapid immunoassay. This study evaluated the performance and false recent rates (FRRs) of the ARRA, interpreted both visually and via a strip reader, in comparison with the LAg-EIA. <b>Methods:</b> Plasma samples were collected from two groups: 634 long-term HIV-infected individuals, identified through routine diagnostic testing, who had not received antiretroviral therapy for over one year, and 224 individuals from high-risk populations. High-risk individuals, including pregnant women, female sex workers, and men who have sex with men, were selected based on behavioral and demographic risk factors. Concordance between the ARRA and LAg-EIA was assessed, and FRRs were calculated for both assays. McNemar's test was used to evaluate agreement, while Spearman's rho was applied to assess correlation between the two methods. <b>Results:</b> Visual interpretation of ARRA demonstrated perfect agreement with LAg-Avidity EIA results (FRR = 0.00%), while the strip reader misclassified two specimens as recent infections (FRR = 0.32%). McNemar's test indicated no significant differences between the methods (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Moderate agreement (Spearman's rho = 0.434) was observed between ARRA strip reader results and LAg-Avidity EIA optical density values. Among high-risk populations, ARRA misclassified one sample as recent, resulting in an inconsistency rate of 0.45%. <b>Conclusions:</b> This study highlights ARRA's reliability in identifying long-term infections and its potential as a point-of-care tool. Its rapid results and ease of use make it a valuable asset for effective HIV surveillance, facilitating targeted epidemic monitoring and enhancing public health interventions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Diagnostics
Published
2025-02-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15040444
Primary Topic
HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of the HIV-1 Rapid Recency Assay and Limiting Antigen Avidity Enzyme Immunoassay for HIV Infection Status Interpretation in Long-Term Diagnosed Individuals in Thailand

Sirilada Pimpa Chisholm, Kanokwan Ngueanchanthong, Petai Unpol, Nitis Smanthong et al.
Diagnostics
HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
article

Evaluation of the HIV-1 Rapid Recency Assay and Limiting Antigen Avidity Enzyme Immunoassay for HIV Infection Status Interpretation in Long-Term Diagnosed Individuals in Thailand

Sirilada Pimpa Chisholm, Kanokwan Ngueanchanthong, Petai Unpol, Nitis Smanthong, Pilailuk Akkapaiboon Okada, Thitipong Yingyong, Supaporn Suparak, Siriphailin Jomjunyoung, Wipawee Thanyacharern
article en

Abstract

<b>Background/Objectives:</b> Accurate surveillance of recent HIV infections is crucial for effective epidemic control and timely intervention. The Limited Antigen Avidity Enzyme Immunoassay (LAg-EIA) allows precise differentiation between recent and long-term HIV infections. To enhance accessibility, it has been developted into a point-of-care test, the Asanté™ HIV-1 Rapid Recency<sup>®</sup> Assay (ARRA), a rapid immunoassay. This study evaluated the performance and false recent rates (FRRs) of the ARRA, interpreted both visually and via a strip reader, in comparison with the LAg-EIA. <b>Methods:</b> Plasma samples were collected from two groups: 634 long-term HIV-infected individuals, identified through routine diagnostic testing, who had not received antiretroviral therapy for over one year, and 224 individuals from high-risk populations. High-risk individuals, including pregnant women, female sex workers, and men who have sex with men, were selected based on behavioral and demographic risk factors. Concordance between the ARRA and LAg-EIA was assessed, and FRRs were calculated for both assays. McNemar's test was used to evaluate agreement, while Spearman's rho was applied to assess correlation between the two methods. <b>Results:</b> Visual interpretation of ARRA demonstrated perfect agreement with LAg-Avidity EIA results (FRR = 0.00%), while the strip reader misclassified two specimens as recent infections (FRR = 0.32%). McNemar's test indicated no significant differences between the methods (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Moderate agreement (Spearman's rho = 0.434) was observed between ARRA strip reader results and LAg-Avidity EIA optical density values. Among high-risk populations, ARRA misclassified one sample as recent, resulting in an inconsistency rate of 0.45%. <b>Conclusions:</b> This study highlights ARRA's reliability in identifying long-term infections and its potential as a point-of-care tool. Its rapid results and ease of use make it a valuable asset for effective HIV surveillance, facilitating targeted epidemic monitoring and enhancing public health interventions.

DiagnosticsVol. 15(4)
Ministry of Public Health (TH), Department of Disease Control (TH), Department of Medical Sciences (TH)
Openalex Percentile: Top 96%
HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.