Repeated False-Positive HIV Test Results in a Patient Taking HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis

Stekler, Joanne D.; Violette, Lauren R; Niemann, Lisa A; McMahan, Vanessa; Katz, David A.; Baeten, Jared M.; Grant, Robert M.; Delaney, Kevin P.

doi:10.1093/ofid/ofy197

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, falsely reactive Geenius™ results have been reported in the setting of pulmonary embolism, malaria, and pregnancy [8]. Additionally, there has been a case of an indeterminate Geenius™ result with HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis use, the mechanism of which remains unclear [9].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Repeated false reactive ADVIA centaur® and bio-rad Geenius™ HIV tests in a patient self-administering anabolic steroids

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: An individual is considered HIV positive when a confirmatory HIV-1/HIV-2 differentiation test returns positive following an initial reactive antigen/antibody combination screen. Falsely reactive HIV screens have been reported in patients with various concomitant infectious and autoimmune conditions. Falsely positive confirmatory HIV differentiation assays are seen less frequently, but have been observed in cases of pregnancy, pulmonary embolism, and malaria. Case presentation: A healthy 27 year-old man was referred after a reactive ADVIA Centaur® HIV Ag/Ab screen and positive Bio-Rad Geenius™ HIV 1/2 Confirmatory assay, suggesting HIV-1 infection. The patient's HIV viral load was undetectable prior to initiation of antiretroviral therapy, and remained undetectable on subsequent testing after initiation of antiretroviral therapy. Both Centaur® and Geenius™ tests were repeated and returned reactive. As this patient was believed to be at low risk of acquiring HIV infection, samples were additionally run on Genscreen™ HIV-1 Ag assay and Fujirebio Inno-LIA™ HIV-1/2 score, with both returning non-reactive. For confirmation, the patient's proviral HIV DNA testing was negative, confirming the initial results as being falsely positive. The patient disclosed that he had been using a variety of anabolic steroids before and during the time of HIV testing. Discussion and conclusions: The erroneous diagnosis of HIV can result in decreased quality of life and adverse effects of antiretroviral therapy if initiated, hence the importance of interpreting the results of HIV testing in the context of an individual patient. This reports suggests a potential association between the use of anabolic steroids and falsely-reactive HIV testing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Repeated false reactive ADVIA centaur® and bio-rad Geenius™ HIV tests in a patient self-administering anabolic steroids

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Eleven percent of seroconverters in the PrEP arm had an undetectable HIV RNA compared to 3% in the placebo arm . Overall, interpretation of HIV RNA and antibody test results can be more challenging in the context of PrEP, and confirming or ruling out a diagnosis can be difficult .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges of HIV diagnosis and management in the context of pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), post‐exposure prophylaxis (PEP), test and start and acute HIV infection: a scoping review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Knowledge of HIV status relies on accurate HIV testing, and is the first step towards access to HIV treatment and prevention programmes. Globally, HIV‐status unawareness represents a significant challenge for achieving zero new HIV infections and deaths. In order to enhance knowledge of HIV status, the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends a testing strategy that includes the use of HIV‐specific antibody point‐of‐care tests (POCT). These POCTs do not detect acute HIV infection, the stage of disease when viral load is highest but HIV antibodies are undetectable. Complicating things further, in the presence of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) or post‐exposure prophylaxis (PEP), other currently available testing technologies, such as viral load detection for diagnosis of acute HIV infection, may yield false‐negative results. In this scoping review, we evaluate the evidence and discuss alternative HIV testing algorithms that may mitigate diagnostic dilemmas in the setting of increased utilization of ART for immediate treatment and prevention of HIV infection. Discussion Missed acute HIV infection prevents people living with HIV (PLHIV) from accessing early treatment, increases likelihood of onward transmission, and allows for inappropriate initiation or continuation of PrEP, which may result in HIV drug resistance. While immediate ART is recommended for all PLHIV, studies have shown that starting ART in the setting of acute HIV infection may result in a delayed or complete absence of development of HIV‐specific antibodies, posing a diagnostic challenge that is particularly pertinent to resource‐limited, high HIV burden settings where HIV‐antibody POCTs are standard of care. Similarly, ART used as PrEP or PEP may supress HIV RNA viral load, complicating current HIV testing algorithms in resource‐wealthy settings where viral detection is included. As rollout of PrEP continues, HIV testing algorithms may need to be modified. Conclusions With increasing use of PrEP and ART in acute infection we anticipate diagnostic challenges using currently available HIV testing strategies. Research and surveillance are needed to determine the most appropriate assays and optimal testing algorithms that are accurate, affordable and sustainable.

show abstract

“…Preliminary data describing HIV test results and partial results from behavioral surveys are presented elsewhere [13,17,[21][22][23]. A description and discussion of one Project DETECT participant with false-positive test results while receiving PrEP has been recently published [24]. c Seroreversion is defined as having at least one point-of-care test result that is positive or reactive followed by a negative or nonreactive test result at a subsequent visit.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospective Evaluation of HIV Testing Technologies in a Clinical Setting: Protocol for Project DETECT

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background HIV testing guidelines provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are continually changing to reflect advancements in new testing technology. Evaluation of existing and new point-of-care (POC) HIV tests is crucial to inform testing guidelines and provide information to clinicians and other HIV test providers. Characterizing the performance of POC HIV tests using unprocessed specimens can provide estimates for the window period of detection, or the time from HIV acquisition to test positivity, which allows clinicians and other HIV providers to select the appropriate POC HIV tests for persons who may be recently infected with HIV. Objective This paper describes the protocols and procedures used to evaluate the performance of the newest POC tests and determine their sensitivity during early HIV infection. Methods Project DETECT is a CDC-funded study that is evaluating POC HIV test performance. Part 1 is a cross-sectional, retrospective study comparing behavioral characteristics and HIV prevalence of the overall population of the Public Health–Seattle & King County (PHSKC) Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Clinic to Project DETECT participants enrolled in part 2. Part 2 is a cross-sectional, prospective study evaluating POC HIV tests in real time using unprocessed whole blood and oral fluid specimens. A POC nucleic acid test (NAT) was added to the panel of HIV tests in June 2018. Part 3 is a longitudinal, prospective study evaluating seroconversion sensitivity of POC HIV tests through serial follow-up testing. For comparison, HIV-1 RNA and HIV-1/HIV-2 antigen/antibody tests are also performed for participants enrolled in part 2 or 3. A behavioral survey that collects information about demographics, history of HIV testing, STD history, symptoms of acute HIV infection, substance use, sexual behaviors in the aggregate and with recent partners, and use of pre-exposure prophylaxis and antiretroviral therapy is completed at each part 2 or 3 visit. Results Between September 2015 and March 2019, there were 14,990 Project DETECT–eligible visits (part 1) to the PHSKC STD Clinic resulting in 1819 part 2 Project DETECT study visits. The longitudinal study within Project DETECT (part 3) enrolled 27 participants with discordant POC test results from their part 2 visit, and 10 (37%) were followed until they had fully seroconverted with concordant positive POC test results. Behavioral survey data and HIV test results, sensitivity, and specificity will be presented elsewhere. Conclusions Studies such as Project DETECT are critical for evaluating POC HIV test devices as well as describing characteristics of persons at risk for HIV acquisition in the United States. HIV tests in development, including POC NATs, will provide new opportunities for HIV testing programs. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR1-10.2196/16332

show abstract

Repeated False-Positive HIV Test Results in a Patient Taking HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis

Cited by 11 publications

References 12 publications

Repeated false reactive ADVIA centaur® and bio-rad Geenius™ HIV tests in a patient self-administering anabolic steroids

Repeated false reactive ADVIA centaur® and bio-rad Geenius™ HIV tests in a patient self-administering anabolic steroids

Challenges of HIV diagnosis and management in the context of pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), post‐exposure prophylaxis (PEP), test and start and acute HIV infection: a scoping review

Prospective Evaluation of HIV Testing Technologies in a Clinical Setting: Protocol for Project DETECT

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About