Assessment of oral fluid HIV test performance in an HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis trial in Bangkok, Thailand

Pravan Suntharasamai, Michael Martin, Kachit Choopanya, Suphak Vanichseni, Udomsak Sangkum, Pairote Tararut, Wanna Leelawiwat, Rapeepan Anekvorapong, Philip A. Mock, Thitima Cherdtrakulkiat, Manoj Leethochawalit, Sithisat Chiamwongpaet, Roman J. Gvetadze, Janet M. McNicholl, Lynn A. Paxton, Somyot Kittimunkong, Marcel E. Curlin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Rapid easy-to-use HIV tests offer opportunities to increase HIV testing among populations at risk of infection. We used the OraQuick Rapid HIV-1/2 antibody test (OraQuick) in the Bangkok Tenofovir Study, an HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis trial among people who inject drugs. Methods: The Bangkok Tenofovir Study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. We tested participants' oral fluid for HIV using OraQuick monthly and blood using a nucleic-acid amplification test (NAAT) every 3 months. We used Kaplan-Meier methods to estimate the duration from a positive HIV NAAT until the mid-point between the last non-reactive and first reactive oral fluid test and proportional hazards to examine factors associated with the time until the test was reactive. Results: We screened 3678 people for HIV using OraQuick. Among 447 with reactive results, 436 (97.5%) were confirmed HIV-infected, 10 (2.2%) HIV-uninfected, and one (0.2%) had indeterminate results. Two participants with non-reactive OraQuick results were, in fact, HIVinfected at screening yielding 99.5% sensitivity, 99.7% specificity, a 97.8% positive predictive value, and a 99.9% negative predictive value. Participants receiving tenofovir took longer to develop a reactive OraQuick (191.8 days) than participants receiving placebo (16.8 days) (p = 0.02) and participants infected with HIV CRF01-AE developed a reactive OraQuick earlier than participants infected with other subtypes (p = 0.04). Discussion: The oral fluid HIV test performed well at screening, suggesting it can be used when rapid results and non-invasive tools are preferred. However, participants receiving tenofovir took longer to develop a reactive oral fluid test result than those receiving placebo. Thus, among people using pre-exposure prophylaxis, a blood-based HIV test may be an appropriate choice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere0145859
JournalPloS one
Volume10
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2015

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
  • General

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Assessment of oral fluid HIV test performance in an HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis trial in Bangkok, Thailand'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Suntharasamai, P., Martin, M., Choopanya, K., Vanichseni, S., Sangkum, U., Tararut, P., Leelawiwat, W., Anekvorapong, R., Mock, P. A., Cherdtrakulkiat, T., Leethochawalit, M., Chiamwongpaet, S., Gvetadze, R. J., McNicholl, J. M., Paxton, L. A., Kittimunkong, S., & Curlin, M. E. (2015). Assessment of oral fluid HIV test performance in an HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis trial in Bangkok, Thailand. PloS one, 10(12), [e0145859]. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0145859