IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0132422.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accounting for False Positive HIV Tests: Is Visceral Leishmaniasis Responsible?

Author

Listed:
  • Leslie Shanks
  • Koert Ritmeijer
  • Erwan Piriou
  • M Ruby Siddiqui
  • Jarmila Kliescikova
  • Neil Pearce
  • Cono Ariti
  • Libsework Muluneh
  • Johnson Masiga
  • Almaz Abebe

Abstract

Background: Co-infection with HIV and visceral leishmaniasis is an important consideration in treatment of either disease in endemic areas. Diagnosis of HIV in resource-limited settings relies on rapid diagnostic tests used together in an algorithm. A limitation of the HIV diagnostic algorithm is that it is vulnerable to falsely positive reactions due to cross reactivity. It has been postulated that visceral leishmaniasis (VL) infection can increase this risk of false positive HIV results. This cross sectional study compared the risk of false positive HIV results in VL patients with non-VL individuals. Methodology/Principal Findings: Participants were recruited from 2 sites in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian algorithm of a tiebreaker using 3 rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) was used to test for HIV. The gold standard test was the Western Blot, with indeterminate results resolved by PCR testing. Every RDT screen positive individual was included for testing with the gold standard along with 10% of all negatives. The final analysis included 89 VL and 405 non-VL patients. HIV prevalence was found to be 12.8% (47/ 367) in the VL group compared to 7.9% (200/2526) in the non-VL group. The RDT algorithm in the VL group yielded 47 positives, 4 false positives, and 38 negatives. The same algorithm for those without VL had 200 positives, 14 false positives, and 191 negatives. Specificity and positive predictive value for the group with VL was less than the non-VL group; however, the difference was not found to be significant (p = 0.52 and p = 0.76, respectively). Conclusion: The test algorithm yielded a high number of HIV false positive results. However, we were unable to demonstrate a significant difference between groups with and without VL disease. This suggests that the presence of endemic visceral leishmaniasis alone cannot account for the high number of false positive HIV results in our study.

Suggested Citation

  • Leslie Shanks & Koert Ritmeijer & Erwan Piriou & M Ruby Siddiqui & Jarmila Kliescikova & Neil Pearce & Cono Ariti & Libsework Muluneh & Johnson Masiga & Almaz Abebe, 2015. "Accounting for False Positive HIV Tests: Is Visceral Leishmaniasis Responsible?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-8, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0132422
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132422
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0132422
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0132422&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0132422?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Derryck B Klarkowski & Joseph M Wazome & Kamalini M Lokuge & Leslie Shanks & Clair F Mills & Daniel P O'Brien, 2009. "The Evaluation of a Rapid In Situ HIV Confirmation Test in a Programme with a High Failure Rate of the WHO HIV Two-Test Diagnostic Algorithm," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(2), pages 1-6, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arielle Lasry & Mireille B Kalou & Paul R Young & Jacqueline Rurangirwa & Bharat Parekh & Stephanie Behel, 2019. "Cost implications of HIV retesting for verification in Africa," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-15, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0132422. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.