HIV‐1/2 screening in blood centers: implementing a two‐step serological screening assay approach to reduce donor deferral

BACKGROUND Screening blood donations for human immunodeficiency virus 1/2 (HIV‐1/2) infection in blood centers is often done with a highly sensitive 3rd‐generation immunoassay which may cause false‐positive results. Donations found repeatedly reactive (RR) are discarded regardless of negative HIV‐1/...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.) Pa.), 2019-06, Vol.59 (6), p.2054-2060
Main Authors: Stoyanov, Evgeniy, Gozlan, Yael, Wax, Marina, Levin, Evelina, Shvartz, Lea, Shinar, Eilat, Mendelson, Ella, Mor, Orna
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Algorithms
Architects
Blood
Blood & organ donations
Blood Banking - methods
Blood Banks - statistics & numerical data
Blood donors
Blood Donors - statistics & numerical data
Donor Selection - statistics & numerical data
HIV
HIV Antibodies - analysis
HIV Antibodies - blood
HIV Infections - blood
HIV Infections - diagnosis
HIV Infections - epidemiology
HIV-1 - genetics
HIV-1 - immunology
HIV-1 - isolation & purification
HIV-2 - genetics
HIV-2 - immunology
HIV-2 - isolation & purification
Human immunodeficiency virus
Humans
Immunoassay
Immunoassay - methods
Mass Screening - methods
Screening
Serologic Tests - methods
Serology
Viruses
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:BACKGROUND Screening blood donations for human immunodeficiency virus 1/2 (HIV‐1/2) infection in blood centers is often done with a highly sensitive 3rd‐generation immunoassay which may cause false‐positive results. Donations found repeatedly reactive (RR) are discarded regardless of negative HIV‐1/2 nucleic acid testing (NAT) and confirmatory assays results. These donors are notified and deferred if RR in a subsequent donation. We evaluated the introduction of a secondary 4th‐generation serological assay to the overall algorithm performance. METHODS All donations collected between January 2016 and May 2018 (574,338) were screened using 3rd‐generation immunoassay (PRISM HIV O Plus) and NAT (Procleix Ultrio/Ultrio Elite). Serology RR donations were tested with 4th‐generation Architect HIV Ag/Ab Combo and Vidas HIV Duo Ultra and a confirmatory assay (Geenius HIV‐1/2). RESULTS The two 4th‐generation assays found that 86% (179/209 on Architect) and 94% (182/193 on Vidas) of the 3rd‐generation immunoassay RR were negative for HIV‐1/2, which were also negative by confirmatory assay. Only 14% (30/209 on Architect) and 6% (11/193 on Vidas) that were 3rd‐generation HIV‐1/2 RR required confirmation, of which eight donors were confirmed as HIV positive. The probability of missing an HIV‐1 infected donor by this algorithm is one in a million RR cases. CONCLUSION The introduction of a two‐step serological screening algorithm in blood centers whereby 4th‐generation assay will be performed for all 3rd‐generation RR blood donors will reduce the number of donations requiring confirmation, save time and money, and most importantly, reduce the number of discarded blood donations and allow re‐entry processes.
ISSN:0041-1132
1537-2995
DOI:10.1111/trf.15245