Technical and Regulatory Shortcomings of the TaqMan Version 1 HIV Viral Load Assay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The lower limit of detection of the original Roche Amplicor HIV plasma viral load (pVL) assay (50 copies/mL) has defined HIV treatment success. The Amplicor assay, however, has been replaced by the Roche TaqMan assay(s). Changes to the limits of detection and calibration have not been validated for clinical utility. Sudden increases in the number of patients with detectable pVL have been reported following the introduction of the TaqMan version 1 assay. METHODS: Between October 2009 and April 2010 all routine pVL samples from British Columbia, Canada, with 40-250 copies/mL by TaqMan were re-tested by Amplicor (N = 1198). Subsequent short-term virological and resistance outcomes were followed in patients with unchanged therapy (N = 279; median 3.2 months follow-up). RESULTS: TaqMan and Amplicor values correlated poorly at low pVL values. Low-level pVL by TaqMan was not associated with impending short-term virological failure; only 17% of patients with 40-250 copies/mL by TaqMan had detectable pVL by Amplicor at follow-up. During the follow-up period only 20% of patients had an increase in pVL by TaqMan (median [IQR]: 80 [36-283] copies/mL). In addition, in ~2.4% of samples pVL was dramatically underestimated by TaqMan due to poor binding of the proprietary TaqMan primers. CONCLUSIONS: The replacement of Amplicor with the TaqMan assay has altered the previously accepted definition of HIV treatment failure without any evidence to support the clinical relevance of the new definition. Given the systematic differences in measurement in the low pVL range the British Columbia HIV treatment guidelines now use a threshold of >250 copies/mL by TaqMan to define treatment failure.
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 | 0.112 | 0.106 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".