Cost and complexity have hindered implementation to date of viral load testing in resource-limited settings. If rapid and timely scale-up is to become a reality, numerous factors will need to be addressed, including health and laboratory system strengthening, pricing, and multiple programmatic and funding challenges.

Background Diagnosis of chronic Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) infection requires both a positive HCV antibody screen and confirmatory nucleic acid test (NAT). HCV core antigen (HCVcAg) is a potential alternative to NAT. Purpose This systematic review evaluated the accuracy of diagnosis of active HCV infection among adults and children for five HCVcAg tests compared to NAT. Data Sources EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane from 1990 through March 31, 2016. Study Selection Cohort, cross-sectional, and randomized controlled trials were included without language restriction Data Extraction Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed quality using an adapted Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Data Synthesis 44 studies evaluated 5 index tests. Studies for the ARCHITECT had the highest quality, while those for Ortho ELISA were the lowest. From bivariate analyses, the sensitivity and specificity with 95% CI were: ARCHITECT 93.4% (90.1, 96.4) and 98.8% (97.4, 99.5), Ortho ELISA 93.2% (81.6, 97.7) and 99.2% (87.9, 100), and Hunan Jynda 59.5% (46.0, 71.7) and 82.9% (58.6, 94.3). Insufficient data were available for a meta-analysis for Lumipulse and Lumispot. In three quantitative studies using ARCHITECT, HCVcAg correlated closely with HCV RNA above 3000 IU/mL. Limitations There was insufficient data on covariates such as HIV or HBV status for sub-group analyses. Few studies reported genotypes of isolates and there were scant data for genotypes 4, 5, and 6. Most studies were conducted in high resource settings within reference laboratories. Conclusions HCVcAg assays with signal amplification have high sensitivity, high specificity, and good correlation with HCV RNA above 3000 IU/mL. HCVcAg assays have the potential to replace NAT in high HCV prevalence settings.

There are inefficiencies in current approaches to monitoring patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART) in sub-Saharan Africa. Patients typically attend clinics every 1–3 months for clinical assessment, with clinic costs being comparable with costs of drugs themselves, CD4 counts are measured every 6 months, yet patients are rarely switched to second-line therapies. To ensure sustainability of treatment programmes a transition to more cost-effective ART deliver is needed. In contrast to the CD4 count, measurement of the level of HIV RNA in plasma (“viral load”) provides a direct measure of current treatment effect. Viral load informed differentiated care is a means of tailoring care whereby those with suppressed viral load have less frequent clinical visits and attention is paid to those with unsuppressed viral load to promote adherence and timely switching to a second-line regimen. The most feasible approach in many countries to measure viral load is by collecting dried blood spot (DBS) samples for testing in regional laboratories, although there have been concerns over the sensitivity/specificity of DBS to define treatment failure and the delay in receiving results. We use modelling to synthesize available evidence and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of viral load-informed differentiated care, account for limitations of DBS. We find that viral load-informed differentiated care using DBS is expected to be cost-effective and is recommended as the strategy for patient monitoring, although further empirical evidence as the approach is rolled out would be of value. We also explore the potential benefits of future availability of point-of-care (POC) viral load tests.

The clear trend of resuppression, following viral load testing and adherence support, demonstrates the utility of viral load as a tool to identify patients in need of enhanced adherence support.