Evaluation of the Core Antigen Assay as a Second-Line Supplemental Test for Diagnosis of Active Hepatitis C Virus Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The British Columbia Center for Disease Control laboratory performs approximately 95% of all hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody tests for the province's 4 million inhabitants. In 2002, the laboratory tested 96,000 specimens for anti-HCV antibodies, of which 4,800 (5%) were seroreactive and required confirmation of active infection. Although HCV RNA assays with a sensitivity of 50 IU/ml or less are recommended for the confirmation of active HCV infection, given the large number of seroreactive specimens tested annually, we evaluated the Ortho trak-C assay (OTCA) as a second-line confirmatory test and determined its limit of detection (LoD). Of 502 specimens from treatment-naïve anti-HCV-positive individuals, 478 had sufficient volumes for evaluation by the OTCA and HCV RNA tests. Core antigen was not detected in 147 of 478 (30.8%) of these specimens, of which 37 of 147 (25.2%) were shown to be viremic by the VERSANT HCV (version 3.0) (branched-DNA) assay and/or the VERSANT HCV qualitative assay. Testing of 144 replicates of a World Health Organization standard dilution series indicated that the LoD of OTCA was approximately 27,000 IU/ml. This LoD is consistent with the inability of OTCA to detect core antigen in clinical specimens with low viral loads. We conclude that OTCA has limited value as a confirmatory test for the diagnosis of active HCV infection because 37 of 367 (10%) of viremic specimens had undetectable core antigen. Qualitative HCV RNA testing remains the present standard for the confirmation of active HCV infection in the diagnostic setting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".