PCR RNA Tests

[Concerned333333]

In my 100 hours of internet education...I have noticed many people advocating the non-intentional use of PCR RNA HIV tests for early detection.  Most still rely on that 90 day antibody test...but I am wondering if anyone has ever tested positive after 60 days with a PCR RNA test when at 60 days it was NOT DETECTED.   It seems to me that this test that measures virus in the blood at such small quantities would be almost conclusive at a certain time period and earlier than antibody testing.  Please advise.

[Concerned333333]

I guess no one wants to establish an opinion on the matter for PCR RNA testing at certain time periods.   After all my studying and reading online it was my last curiosity.   Thanks

[Teak]

If you are aware of the guidelines then move on.. Enough is enough..

[Concerned333333]

I appreciate the facts...I was just wondering if you had ever heard of the situation I posed?   I am aware of the guidelines and possibilities as minte as they may be...I just figured after so much cost incurred for testing if a 70 day Negative PCR RNA test that was NON-DETECTED and a 75 day Negative antibody would be conclusive...since it would seem that if one was negative the other would be positive or vice-versa.    It is easy to say the 90 day antibody is 100% conclusive...I guess some people like myself are so anxious to feel confident about our testing.  

[Teak]

A specimen that is nonreactive in the APTIMA HIV-1 RNA Qualitative Assay and nonreactive for HIV-1 antibodies (or a test for HIV-1 antibodies has not been done) should be interpreted that HIV-1 RNA was not detected (see row D in the table below). However, a nonreactive test result does not preclude the possibility of exposure to or infection with HIV-1.

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/BloodBloodProducts/ApprovedProducts/LicensedProductsBLAs/BloodDonorScreening/InfectiousDisease/UCM149927.pdf

[Concerned333333]

I have read that statement and it has echoed by you many times in the forum...for which I am more educated for it.  My question is have you ever heard of a changing PCR RNA test result after 28 days.  As educated as you are...I am just curious and realize it is not a stand alone test.    I have heard Dr. HHH say 10 weeks will suffice...but will still test at 13 weeks to be reassured.   So...have you heard of a changing PCR RNA test result?  

[Teak]

PCR-RNA tests are NOT stand alone tests and must be used in conjunction with an antibody tests and no test is conclusive until 3 months post exposure.

[Concerned333333]

I have read 100 of your posts and repect you 100% Teak.  My question to you is have you ever heard of a PCR RNA test after 28 days that was negative later turn positive with an antibody test.   I have not been able to find one situation where that has happened.  I understand prior to 28 days that PCR RNA can give a false result but what about after 28 days?  My question is have YOU ever heard of a changing result???  

[Teak]

3 months is conclusive.

[Concerned333333]

Would a 75 day negative anti-body test and not detected HIV RNA PCR test at 70 days be 100% CONCLUSIVE?  

[Concerned333333]

I have seen many posts by you Mike and you are reassuring and educated.  I appreciate your help in clarifying this matter.  I especially enjoyed the write up on the no risk of oral sex you did most recently on another post.  Thanks for your help and you do a great service for all of us.   I see Vance's name all around too...thanks for the help and clarification.    

[mike_no]

http://es.medhelp.org/posts/HIV-Prevention/RNA-test/show/40373

[Vance2335]

The only approved method for diagnosising HIV is an antibody test. That is the standard by the CDC and many other countries health agencies. This method is the best method to use and follow.
An antigen test is not approved and I believe is used for people at high risk to help as an early indicator. High risk is unprotected sex...with someone confirmed to be HIV+.