2017
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.24919
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

HCV avidity as a tool for detection of recent HCV infection: Sensitivity depends on HCV genotype

Abstract: Accurate detection of incident hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is required to target and evaluate public health interventions, but acute infection is largely asymptomatic and difficult to detect using traditional methods. Our aim was to evaluate a previously developed HCV avidity assay to distinguish acute from chronic HCV infection. Plasma samples collected from recent seroconversion subjects in two large Australian cohorts were tested using the avidity assay, and the avidity index (AI) was calculated. Defi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
2
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
(72 reference statements)
1
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, in this study we defined recent HCV infection using an HCV antibody avidity index <30% and a positive HCV RNA viral load. This definition is not supported by all studies to date[ 56 ], though the implications on our findings are limited given the small number of HCV RNA positive samples found in our study. Lastly, there are limitations inherent to the statistical methodology, with cautious interpretation of findings suggested.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 72%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In addition, in this study we defined recent HCV infection using an HCV antibody avidity index <30% and a positive HCV RNA viral load. This definition is not supported by all studies to date[ 56 ], though the implications on our findings are limited given the small number of HCV RNA positive samples found in our study. Lastly, there are limitations inherent to the statistical methodology, with cautious interpretation of findings suggested.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 72%
“…Diagnosis can also be delayed and problematic, as it can be difficult to distinguish between acute, resolved, and chronic infections when using immunoglobulin M (IgM) anti-HCV testing[ 48 , 49 ].HCV antibody avidity assays are research tools that measure the binding strength of anti-HCV antibodies in infected individuals. These assays can be used in research to distinguish recent infection from chronic and resolved HCV infections[ 48 , 50 56 ]. HCV antibody avidity increases gradually over the course of HCV infection: antibodies produced early in infection have weak antigen-binding ability while mature antibodies generated later in infection have strong antigen-binding capacity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is consistent with the findings of the previous studies which were based on whole blood (serum) analysis (Croom et al, 2006, Tuaillon et al, 2010, Hope et al, 2011, Shepherd et al, 2013. There was a sharp increment in AI value for genotype 1 compared to non-genotype 1 infections and this is consistent with the report of Shepherd et al (Shepherd et al, 2018).…”
Section: Discussion (Part Ii)supporting
confidence: 93%
“…First, the accuracy of Ab avidity-based results for the identification of recent infections is still debatable, as we could not determine the false recent rate (FRR) of HCV infections. It is also possible that different HCV genotypes and the occurrence of HIV co-infections could have skewed our estimation of recent HCV infections in either direction [9, 35]. Moreover, the gold standard approach for measuring incidence (i.e., negative followed by positive test results through a longitudinal follow-up) cannot be used during outbreak situations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%