Window period of RNA HIV test

What is the window period of the RNA HIV test right now?

Some websites say 1-2 weeks but some researchers say it would take 5 weeks (but the research is posted nearly ten years ago)

I have unprotected sex with a prostitute on 17th July, i plan to have a RNA test on 1st August.

[Teak]

Window period is still three months. PCR RNA tests are not stand alone tests and have to be followed up with an antibody test.

[ben9999imsc]

please do not say something that you dont understand.

The antibody needs about 3 months to develop, but the RNA test is to test the HIV directly, the official window period of RNA test is 9-11 days or 1-2 weeks.

[Teak]

You were given the facts. PCR-RNA tests are not diagnostic tests. They are supplemental tests. Go to the FDA website and look it up.

The AMPLICOR HIV-1 MONITOR Test is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV or as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV infection.

http://www.fda.gov/Cber/PMAlabel/P9500054LB.pdf

[ben9999imsc]

It was not few years ago.

in 2006, RNA test is approved by FDA for diagnostic use

http://www.fda.gov/oashi/aids/listserve/listserve2006.html#10606

[alienshadow]

No it isnt my god you read and read you need to get the facts right

[Teak]

I guess you can't comprehend what you read. Now before you go trying to correct anyone have your facts straight.

"The test, however, is not meant to be used as a stand-alone test for the diagnosis of HIV-1 infection.  A positive nucleic acid test should be viewed as a unconfirmed test result, indicating probable infection, and should be followed up later with traditional EIA antibody testing to confirm infection with the Human Immunodeficiency Virus."

http://www.fda.gov/oashi/aids/listserve/listserve2006.html#10606

[ben9999imsc]

i didn't say it is a stand-alone test, i am just say RNA is for diagnostic use.

"however, the APTIMA test has been approved for the diagnosis of primary HIV-1 infection, as well as for confirming HIV-1 infection when tests for antibodies to HIV-1 are positive.
"

Actually i am asking how long is the window period for RNA test.

Anti-body test is 3 months, not RNA.

http://www.metrokc.gov/health/APU/rna-testing/

[Teak]

MOVE ON. You can't comprehend what you read and we are not going to argue with you over it. An RNA doesn't have a window period. It's a monitoring test. Anymore and you will be reported to MedHelp.

[ben9999imsc]

RNA has a window period, it cannot detect HIV copies less than 40 copies/ml.

please report me, i dont know what i have done is wrong. I am just asking the actual window period of RNA test but you guys said it is 3 months and none.  

[Teak]

Do you know what a viral load test is? Did you or did you not read what an RNA test is used for? It's a supplemental test, it's also a montoring test.  It cannot give you a conclusive test result by itself.  I get a PCR RNA every 3 months so don't try to tell me about RNA testing.

[ben9999imsc]

You test RNA every 3 months and says RNA test does not have window period. But according to Public Health (http://www.metrokc.gov/health/APU/rna-testing/), it says 1-2 weeks. Again, i just asking the actual window period of RNA test.

[Kerano]

Stop arguing.  You posted like you wanted help, then you get the answers, and I guess don't like what you hear, so you answer your own question.
No more posting, or there will be a warning from MedHelp.

[Teak]

Forget it. Anyone that comes to this forum and asks if there is a cure for HIV isn't doing anything but playing games.

[ben9999imsc]

some websites say 9-11 days and some websites say 1-2 weeks but some researchers say it is 5 weeks, i just wondering which one is correct.

[Teak]

What was your risk to begin with that brought you to this forum?

[Kerano]

So, ya think the "T" word?  

[Teak]

No doubt about it.

[mike_no]

RNA PCR is an excellent test for early detection since it directly looks for the HIV genetic material in the body directly.

RNA PCR is for early detection, test at the 14 th day after the exposure backed up by an antibody test at the 12th week is good enough to rule out HIV.

"These tests, which are more costly and used less often than antibody tests "

1. They are expensive
2. They are not a stand alone test, they have to backed up by an anti body test FOR CONFIRMATORY REASONS ONLY.

[trekstar]

Studies seem to indicate that the viral load would peak around three weeks after exposure, so it is often recommended to take the RNA test after 21 days. Information about the PCR is often dubious. I've read some studies about detection of primary infection and PCR and this is what I've gathered:

* All studies show that PCR/RNA is 100% accurate during ARS
* "False positives" are, despite of what you read, very rare with the new assays. Also, a false positive result is easy to detect (viral load <2500) and will be negative after re-testing.

Of course there will be exceptions.

In Austria, a PCR/RNA after three weeks is often considered conclusive, and most experts there will tell you that it's as accurate as a three-months ELISA. In the neighbouring country, Switzerland, however, they don't use the test at all... Go figure.

[Teak]

* "False positives" are, despite of what you read, very rare with the new assays. Also, a false positive result is easy to detect (viral load <2500) and will be negative after re-testing.

That's total BS. My viral load is less than 50 and I'm indeed postive.

[trekstar]

I guess you read that one through too hastily, Teak. What you describe is a false NEGATIVE, now a false positive. A false negative result at three weeks would be extremely unlikely, although I'm sure they do happen... there are at least four studies on primary infection that show that viral-load test was able to pick up ALL of the real positive subjects suffering from ARS.

[Teak]

I did not read your post to hastily. What I quoted is what you posted. A viral load of <2500 does not mean a person is not positive at all. Not all people have ARS.

[Teak]

King County Public Health, the Dr. HHH is a member.

The FDA has not approved these PCR tests as ways to identify new HIV infections. The regular antibody test continues to be the most accurate and reliable way for people to know if they are infected with HIV.

[trekstar]

This is what I mean:

A false-positive result (that is, a detectable, low viral load in a blood sample from a person that is not infected), when it does happen, will easily be recognised as a false-positive, because, if taken during the first weeks since possible infection, the viral load would be expected to be much higher. Also, when this sample is re-run, it will indeed be undetectable.

[Teak]

PCR-RNA are not stand alone tests even in Austria. All PCR-RNA tests must be followed up with an antibody test.

[ben9999imsc]

you said your viral load test is less than 50 copies but the antibody test is positive? If so, how many antibody you have?

[Teak]

There is no tests to tell you how many antibodies one has. You can get a CD4 count and a VL count. VL counts are used to monitor ones progression.

[alienshadow]

MOVE ON  and stop TROLLING the froum with all your nonsense and yeah I have reported you

[ben9999imsc]

I think the RNA test can confirm one person is negative but can not determine one person is 100% infected. According to several websites, seems that RNA have not given false-negative result after 7 days of possible exposure.

If it is true, that's enough for most people.

[Teak]

The only time an RNA test is approved as a confirmative test is when the Western Blot and IRF tests are inconclusive. They cannot confirm a positive result by itself. What part is it that you don't understand? An RNA test is not approved to give a conclusive result in early HIV infection. I'm done wasting my time with you on this conversation.

[ben9999imsc]

You know, most reliable websites say RNA test is very accurate. I think people would like to trust the websites more than your personal opinions. Just google RNA test, there is a lot of results against to your speech. I am not a professional, all my speech is just refer to websites' information. Seems that most your opinoins are opposite than the websites such as the window period of RNA. If you are not a professional, please use reference to support your speech. I'm done wasting my time with you on this conversation.

ref.

http://www.ehow.com/how_2088620_read-rna-hiv-test-results.html
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/hiv-testing/ID00050
http://www.metrokc.gov/health/APU/rna-testing/

[Teak]

Jerk go to the FDA website and if you find where the FDA states that it is approved for diagnosing HIV infection other than what we have told you. you post it. This forum deals with facts not YOUR opinions. Now go search the FDA approvals on PCR-RNA tests.

[Teak]

http://www.metrokc.gov/health/APU/rna-testing/
RNA testing is not a substitute for antibody testing. It’s a good additional test for those who may have had a recent risk (within the past 1 - 4 weeks) for HIV.

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/show/580324
PCR or RNA tests. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests involve evaluating a blood sample for genetic material — RNA or DNA — produced by the HIV virus infection. These tests measure the amount of virus present in your blood (viral load) and are most useful for monitoring your condition after you've already been diagnosed with HIV. The tests may return a false-negative result if infection with HIV occurred too recently, such as fewer than five days ago.

http://www.fda.gov/Cber/PMAlabel/P9500054LB.pdf
The AMPLICOR HIV-1 MONITOR Test is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV or as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV infection.

[789khaier416]

had vaginal sex with a prostitute with a condom. 80 days after my  exposure I took an HIV PCR RNA test was negative.then i took another antibody  test @ WEEK 14 ALSO WAS Negative. so my question is should i move on ?i need some advise iam so worry please.

[sonemed]

the RNA is monitoring test, must be followed up with an antibody test. !!!!!!!!

[LIZZIE LOU]

CONDOM PROTECTED sex is not a risk for contracting hiv.

your antibody test at 14 weeks is RELIABLE and CONCLUSIVE.  

[blessed1111]

However, if your exposure occurred within the last few weeks, the level of antibody may not be high enough to be detected. It is in this “window period” of more recent exposure that the virus may be detectable with an HIV RNA test (viral load) to determine your HIV status.

FDA website. This is not what the test is used for no. But for early detection you can use it.

[Teak]

Wrong.

[Healthlogic]

PCR RNA explained by a lab technician

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN3sPuv2J6c&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[RainLover71]

It depends who you ask,some HIV specialists will tell you that the HIV RNA by PCR is an excellent test for EARLY detection,However,we all know that a test at 12 weeks is final and conclusive.

[Teak]

Doesn't matter who you ask, that has nothing to do with it. PCR-RNA test are not standalone tests and cannot give a diagnostic by itself.

[bluemoon1]

I had all classical ARS starters week 2 its rash, joint pain, tounsils, stuffy neck, itchy body, burning sensation, floatring, oral thrush, night sweets, weight loss, but tested negative for HIV after 16 weeks, can I be 100 % sure I am HIV free? But my symptoms still not let me believe on my results do I need PCR test to put every thing behind? Or I am fine 100% and can have unprotected sex with my girl friend b coz she want to have a baby now?
Plz help I will appreciate your help.

[Teak]

Your test is conclusive and you do not need further testing.