Reproducibility of hepatitis C virus antibody detection with various confirmatory assays

Results of Viral Marker Screening of Unpaid Blood Donations and Probability of Window Period Donations in 1997

“…Another crucial factor is the identification of true seroconverters from serologic screening results. This may lead to overestimation of true seroconversions, particularly in case of anti–HCV, as widely discussed by other authors [26, 27, 28, 29]. …”

Improved efficiency of national HIV, HCV, and HTLV antibody testing algorithms based on sequential screening immunoassays

“…In respect to HCV, the genotypic source of the Abbott-Murex assay (1b) is the key selection factor because the PRISM HCV ChLIA is based on a genotype 1a source, and common FP reactions have been reported to occur at significant rates for HCV 1a-based assays used in tandem. 7,18 Although the BFR overlap between the PRISM HCV and Abbott-Murex assays was above the targeted 5 percent guideline set for IA2 selection, it must be noted that of 81 samples that were reactive on the IA1 and IA2, 72 were indeterminate on immunoblot. Because these donors had reacted on both the 1a and 1b screening as- says as well as having immunoblot reactivity, it is likely that many represent "true" HCV antibody reactions with a single-band reactivity pattern.…”

Screening for viral markers in volunteer and replacement blood donors in West Africa

“…In our study, the repeat‐reactive rate with the primary screening assay was considerably lower (2·9 versus 11·5%). We also considered that the positivity of two separate screening assays was adequate to define confirmed positive samples, although some of these samples reacted only with the NS3 antigen in RIBA‐3 [19,20]. As shown in this study, the choice of EIA can make a substantial difference in the efficacy of the various testing algorithms used.…”