Article Sidebar
Article Details
While African Health Sciences has been freely accessible online there have been questions on whether it is Open Access or not. We wish to clearly state that indeed African Health Sciences is Open Access. There are key issues regarding Open Access needing clarification for avoidance of doubt:
- 1. Henceforth, papers in African Health Sciences will be published under the CC BY (Creative Commons Attribution License) 4.0 International. See details on https://creativecomons.org/)
- 2. The copyright owners or the authors grant the 3rd party (perpetually and in advance) the right to disseminate, reproduce, or use the research papers in part or in full, format/medium as long as:
- No substantive errors are introduced in the process
- Attribution of authorship and correct citation details are given
- The referencing details are not changed.
Should the papers be reproduced in part, this must be clearly stated.
- 3. The papers will be freely and universally accessible online in an easily readable format such as XML in at least one widely recognized open access repository such as PUBMED CENTRAL.
B. ABRIDGED LICENCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN AUTHORS AND African Health Sciences
I submitted my manuscript to African Health Sciences and would like to affirm that:
1.0 I am authorized by my co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
2.0 I guarantee, on behalf of self and co-authors:
- That the paper is original, and has not been published in any other peer-reviewed journal; nor is it under consideration by other journal (s). It does not infringe existing copyright or any other person’s rights
- That we are/I am the sole author(s) of the paper and with authority to enter into this agreement. My granting rights to African Health Sciences is not in breach of any other obligation
- That the paper contains nothing unlawful, or libelous. Nor anything that would constitute a breach of contract, confidence or commitment given to secrecy, if published
- That I/we have taken care to ensure the integrity of the article.
3.0 I and all co-authors, agree that the paper, if accepted for publication, shall be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0. (see https://creativecommons.org/)
Main Article Content
Problems encountered in conventional HIV 1/2 Algorithms: lack of necessity for immunoblot assays to confirm repeated ELISA reactive results
Abstract
Background: The use of conventional (serologically based) HIV 1/2 diagnostic algorithms has become controversial in recent years.
Objectives: Sera from patients who underwent verification tests were evaluated because repeated ELISA-reactive results demonstrated a HIV1+HIV2 positive band pattern.
Methods: The line immunoassay (LIA) test was used for repeated HIV enzyme immunoassays (EIA)-reactive sera in patients at three centers. The Bio-Rad Geenius™ HIV 1/2 and the HIV-1 RNA tests were used. HIV-1 and RNA HIV-2 were investigated using PCR.
Results: LIA was used to evaluate 3,224 out of 10,591 samples with repeated ELISA reactivity (30%). We found that 32 (1%) of the sera, along with HIV1 bands and HIV2 gp36 bands, were positive. Only 28 of the 32 verified serum samples with gp36 bands were repeated, and no gp36 band positivity was detected using the Bio-Rad Geenius™ HIV-1/2 confirmatory assay in these serum samples. The HIV-2 proviral DNAs were also negative. Therefore, we excluded the possibility of HIV1+2 co-infection. All samples from the 32 patients were positive for HIV-1 RNA.
Conclusion: Our findings highlight the need to exclude confirmatory tests like the LIA test from the current diagnostic HIV algorithm and replace it with rapid HIV-1 and HIV-2 confirmatory immunochromotographic tests.
Keywords: HIV, AIDS, HIV-2.
