These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Performance of genotypic algorithms for predicting HIV-1 tropism measured against the enhanced-sensitivity Trofile coreceptor tropism assay.
    Author: Sánchez V, Masiá M, Robledano C, Padilla S, Ramos JM, Gutiérrez F.
    Journal: J Clin Microbiol; 2010 Nov; 48(11):4135-9. PubMed ID: 20861336.
    Abstract:
    The objectives of this study were to assess the performance of genotypic algorithms for predicting CXCR4-using virus, with enhanced sensitivity Trofile HIV coreceptor tropism assay (ES Trofile) as the reference, and to compare the concordance/accuracy of genotypic tests with ES Trofile and with the original Trofile assay. Paired phenotypic and genotypic determinations of HIV-1 coreceptor usage were compared in plasma samples from HIV-1-infected patients. Sequencing of the third hypervariable (V3) loop of the viral gene and phenotypic assays were performed for each sample. Genotypic rules used to predict tropism were Geno2pheno (false-positive rate at 1 to 20%), position-specific scoring matrix X4R5 (PSSM(X4R5)) and PSSM(sinsi) (where "sinsi" stands for syncytium inducing and non-syncytium inducing), and the 11/25, 11/24/25, and net charge rules. Two hundred forty-four phenotypic and genotypic samples were tested. Coreceptor usage was obtained from ES Trofile for 145 (59%) samples and from Trofile for 99 (41%) samples. The highest concordance (82.6%) was obtained with PSSM(X4R5) when ES Trofile was used as the reference. Geno2pheno at a 20% false-positive rate showed the highest sensitivity (76.7%) for CXCR4-using virus detection with ES Trofile. Samples from naïve subjects and those with CD4 cell counts between 200 and 500 cells/mm(3) showed the best predictive performance. Overall, the accuracy of the bioinformatics tools to detect CXCR4-using virus was similar for ES Trofile and Trofile; however, the negative predictive values for genotypic tools with ES Trofile were slightly higher than they were with Trofile. The accuracy of genotypic algorithms for detecting CXCR4-using viruses is high when using ES Trofile as the reference. Results are similar to those obtained with Trofile. The concordance with ES Trofile is better with higher CD4 cell counts and nonexposure to antiretroviral therapy.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]