RESUMO
The objective of this report was to evaluate oral fluid and urine as optional samples for HIV-1 confirmatory test using DAVIH-BLOT system (Laboratorios DAVIH, La Habana, Cuba), for which they were compared with their corresponding serum samples in a group of 125 individuals. In band pattern analysis, predominant antibodies in positives oral fluid and urine samples against p34, p68, gp41, gp120, were no different from their corresponding sera according to the proportion comparison test (p < 0,001). Relative sensitivity and specificity of this system were 100% in oral fluid and 98, 75% and 100% in urine samples respectively. These results support optional use of oral fluid and urine that, with slight modifications in the diagnostic system, can be applied for HIV-1 antibody confirmation testing.
Assuntos
Sorodiagnóstico da AIDS/métodos , Western Blotting/métodos , Anticorpos Anti-HIV/análise , Infecções por HIV/diagnóstico , HIV-1/imunologia , Saliva/imunologia , Urinálise , Especificidade de Anticorpos , Anticorpos Anti-HIV/urina , Antígenos HIV/imunologia , Infecções por HIV/metabolismo , Infecções por HIV/urina , Humanos , Imunoglobulina G/análise , Imunoglobulina G/imunologia , Sensibilidade e EspecificidadeRESUMO
We evaluated, for the first time in Latin America, the performance of a commercial enzyme immunoassay (EIA) (Calypte Biomedical Corporation, Berkeley, Calif.) that detects human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-specific antibodies in urine in comparison to standard serological assays (two commercial EIAs and a commercial Western blot [WB] assay). Paired serum and urine specimens were collected from two different groups of Brazilian patients: 225 drug users with unknown HIV status who attended drug treatment centers in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and 135 subjects with known HIV status. Patients showing positive results in the serum EIAs and/or in the urine EIA were serologically confirmed by WB assay. For 135 individuals with known HIV status, the urine EIA showed 100% sensitivity (74 positive samples) and 95.1% specificity (58 of 61 negative specimens). For 225 drug users, the test showed 100% sensitivity (2 positive samples) and 98.7% specificity (220 of 223 negative samples) compared to WB-confirmed serological EIA results. Thus, in a total of 360 samples, the urine EIA correctly identified all 76 HIV-positive samples and 278 of 284 negative samples (100% sensitivity and 97.9% specificity). Detailed analysis of the urine EIA results indicates that an increase of the recommended cutoff value might raise the specificity of the assay without affecting its sensitivity. Our results suggest that the HIV-1 urine EIA is a good screening test suitable for developing countries like Brazil. However, as for all other HIV screening tests on the market, it is not specific enough to be used as a one-step test and therefore requires confirmation.