Performance Evaluation of the OraQuick Hepatitis C Virus Rapid Antibody Test.
10.3343/alm.2013.33.3.184
- Author:
Young Joo CHA
1
;
Quehn PARK
;
Eun Suk KANG
;
Byung Chul YOO
;
Kyoung Un PARK
;
Jin Wook KIM
;
Yoo Sung HWANG
;
Myung Hee KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Chung-Ang University Healthcare System and Medical Device Clinical Trials Center, Seoul, Korea. chayoung@cau.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Evaluation Studies ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- Keywords:
Hepatitis C virus;
Rapid test;
Performance evaluation;
Clinical sensitivity;
Clinical specificity;
Oral fluid
- MeSH:
Cross Reactions;
Hepacivirus/*immunology;
Hepatitis C/blood/*diagnosis;
Hepatitis C Antibodies/*blood;
Humans;
Immunoassay;
Reagent Kits, Diagnostic;
Saliva/immunology/virology;
Sensitivity and Specificity
- From:Annals of Laboratory Medicine
2013;33(3):184-189
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: A reliable rapid assay for hepatitis C virus (HCV) may be helpful in various clinical settings. We evaluated the performance of the OraQuick HCV Rapid Antibody Test (OraSure Technologies Inc., Bethlehem, PA, USA). METHODS: Clinical sensitivity and specificity were evaluated with oral fluids and sera from 137 patients diagnosed with hepatitis C and 300 healthy blood donors in a multi-center collaborative study. The stored sera of 200 proven HCV-infected patients and 200 healthy subjects were also evaluated. Analytical sensitivity was estimated with 4 commercial seroconversion panels and 7 Korean reference panels. The performance of 4 laboratory-based tests (3 chemiluminescence assays and 1 enzyme immunoassay) and 4 rapid test kits was compared. We also assessed the interference due to bilirubin, hemoglobin, lipid, rheumatoid factor, multipara, and several viral infections. RESULTS: The clinical sensitivity and specificity of the OraQuick HCV test using oral fluid were 97.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93.2-99.4%) and 100% (95% CI, 98.4-100%), respectively. The clinical sensitivity using serum samples was 100%. Using the 4 seroconversion panels, the OraQuick HCV test showed results comparable to those of the laboratory-based assays; its analytical sensitivity was higher than that of the other rapid test kits. There was no cross-reactivity with common interfering factors. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical performance of the OraQuick HCV Test is comparable to that of laboratory-based tests with both serum and oral fluid. This supports the supplementary use of rapid HCV testing using oral fluid in various medical and non-medical settings.
