Objective: To explore the diagnostic value of anti-HCV and HCV RNA so as to provide an accurate and efficient detection strategy for the diagnosis of HCV in intravenous drug users. Methods: 527 plasma samples from intravenous drug users were collected, and preliminary anti-HCV ELISA screening test was performed. A recombinant immunoblot assay (RIBA) was used as confirmatory assay for reactive antibody samples. All samples were tested for HCV RNA, followed by analysis of anti-HCV screening test, RIBA and HCV nucleic acid test results. Results: Anti-HCV ELISA results were reactive in 386 out of 527 intravenous drug users and non-reactive in 141. Among the 386 reactive antibody samples detected by RIBA, 370 cases were anti-HCV positive, 6 cases were anti-HCV indeterminate and 10 cases were anti-HCV negative. Anti-HCV ELISA and RIBA positive coincidence detection rate was 95.85% (370/386), and 70.21% (370/527) among intravenous drug users. HCV RNA was negative in all 10 anti-HCV RIBA non-reactive samples. 376 anti-HCV RIBA-positive and indeterminate samples were tested for HCV RNA, of which 56.93% (300/527) were current HCV infection, and 14.42% (76/527) were past HCV infection. Among 141 anti-HCV ELISA negative samples, the residual risk by anti-HCV ELISA screening for HCV RNA was 1.52% (8/527). HCV viral load distribution among intravenous drug users showed that the high viral load value (>10(7) IU/ml) and low viral load values (< 10(2) IU/ml) accounted for 1.95% and 2.27%, respectively, while the samples with viral load value of 1×10(2) ~ 1×10(7) IU/ mL accounted for 95.78% (295/308), and were mainly distributed in 1×10(5) ~ 1×10(6) IU/ml (37.99%). ELISA + RIBA + NAT assay detection strategies had differentiated 300 cases of current HCV infection, 76 cases of past HCV infection and 10 cases of false positive anti-HCV results, while ELISA+NAT assay detection strategies had only detected 300 cases of current HCV infection. However, of the 386 positive subjects screened for antibodies, 10 (2.59%) were undifferentiated false positives. Conclusion: Intravenous drug users are the high-risk population of HCV infection with high prevalence and high viral load. Anti-HCV screening for intravenous drug users will have a certain degree of residual risk. Therefore, anti-HCV ELISA screening and nucleic acid detection strategy can accurately diagnose the current infected patients; however, it cannot distinguish the false positive results of antibody screening.
目的: 探讨抗-HCV及HCV RNA检测在静脉吸毒人群中HCV感染的诊断价值,为静脉吸毒人群HCV感染诊断提供一种准确、高效的检测策略。 方法: 收集527例静脉吸毒者的血浆样本,先进行抗-HCV筛查试验(ELISA),对结果呈反应性样本用重组免疫印迹试验(RIBA)进行抗体确证;并对所有样本进行HCV RNA检测,然后分析抗-HCV筛查试验、RIBA及HCV RNA检测(NAT)结果。对数据进行统计描述。 结果: 527例静脉吸毒者样本的抗-HCV ELISA结果中有386例呈反应性,141例为抗-HCV阴性;经RIBA检测386例抗体反应性样本中有370例抗-HCV阳性、6例抗-HCV不确定和10例抗-HCV阴性。抗-HCV ELISA与RIBA检测阳性符合率为95.85% (370/386),静脉吸毒人群中抗-HCV阳性率为70.21%(370/527)。10例抗-HCV RIBA阴性样本经HCV RNA检测,均为阴性。376例抗-HCV RIBA阳性和不确定样本经HCV RNA检测,有56.93%(300/527)为HCV现症感染,14.42%(76/527)为HCV既往感染。对141例抗-HCV ELISA结果呈阴性的样本进行HCV RNA检测,抗-HCV ELISA筛查残余风险度为1.52%(8/527)。静脉吸毒人群中HCV病毒载量分布显示,高载量值(>10(7) IU/ml)和低载量值(<10(2) IU/ml)分别占1.95%和2.27%,而载量值在1×10(2)~1×10(7) IU/ml的样本占95.78% (295/308),且主要分布于1×10(5)~1×10(6) IU/ml(37.99%)。"ELISA+RIBA+NAT"的检测策略能区分300例HCV现症感染、76例HCV既往感染及10例抗-HCV假阳性结果,而"ELISA+NAT"检测策略能检测出300例HCV现症感染者,但不能区分出386例抗体筛查阳性者中存在的10例抗体筛查假阳性(2.59%)。 结论: 静脉吸毒人群是HCV感染的高危人群,有很高的现症感染率,这些HCV感染者体内病毒载量值均维持在较高水平。对静脉吸毒人群抗-HCV筛查将有一定的残余风险度,因此,对静脉吸毒人群用抗-HCV ELISA筛查加核酸检测策略能准确诊断现症感染者,但不能区分出抗体筛查假阳性。.
Keywords: Hepatitis C virus; Intravenous drug users; Nucleic acid test; Recombinant immunoblot assay.