DNA PCR Testing Question?

[ScaredinUSA]

Doc,

I have been searching online for more info regarding DNA PCR Testing of HIV.  Across the boards I have seen a negative consenus on using this test for low risk exposures.

What would be the right time window to take a DNA PCR test?   The test looks for HIV virus DNA, so wouldn't be more accurate earlier than anti-body.  Isn't the DNA present regardless of antibodies?

My concerns are over a 1 time unprotected vaginal sex encounter with a female friend of mine (she said she does not have HIV, she had sex 1 other time only,  unprotected though, between her last HIV test (neg)).  At 40 days (5 weeks,5 days) I could not deal with the stress anymore and took a anti-body test and DNA PCR test (labcorp test from www.areuatrisk.com) and both were negatvie.  I have read all of the posts with time to test positive, etc. If seroconversion hadn't happened at 40 days yet, would a PCR negative results still be valid.  The reason why I am posting is at 70 days post exposure I am having some pressure (not necessarily pain) on the left side of my groin (I can't tell if my lymph nodes are swollen) and have had a headache. I really want to move on from this, as I am about to buy my first home and finally start my adult life.  After the negative results I was fine, but once I felt some pressure in my groin, I started to be concerned again.  

If seroconversion hadn't happend yet at the time of the anti-body test, how reliable would the DNA PCR be at 40 days.  Is the false positive rate and cost of the test the real downside to this testing method, but otherwise it is a very good test?  there is not a lot of information online about this testing method - besides people recommending not to take it for the false positive rate.  

Also, would you recommend a retest?
Thanks for all of your help!

[aa2984]

A related discussion, DNA PCR at 30 days?... was started.

[o_g]

Teak: Ronnie is indeed correct in calling Proviral DNA PCR a diagnostic test. That indeed is the only purpose of the test. It is not meant to monitor HIV progression and treatment. FDA approved or not is another matter and totally irrelevant to the fact that PCR DNA is only a diagnostic test and serves no other purpose whatsoever. I have to say that it seems you are not completely aware of this test and confusing it with HIV RNA test.
Just trying to help!!!

[Ronnie99]

Teak: I said my last post was my last in this thread, but I do not appreciate your personal attacks, especially when you are spreading incorrect information. You might get the test regularly, but you are sadly uninformed on which test you are receiving. The viral load test is a PCR RNA test. Sorry, but you do not seem to understand that fact. Please move on and read up on this subject matter instead of spreading false info. Not a single link you have posted has disputed my explanation of the two tests. To the readers here, just look up on google the terms "viral load", hiv, test, PCR and you will see that the test that measures viral load for treatment is the PCR RNA test.

[Teak]

Because the commercial laboratories and the PCR test manufacturers are promoting the test for a differnent purpose than you used it for. The main use of the test is to monitor the status of someone's ongoing HIV infection, not to diagnose new infections. For that purpose--which as I said above is not recommended in situations like yours--there is no reason to use PCR beyond ~4 weeks, when the antibody tests are positive.

HHH, MD

o_g, you and ronnie can gave out all the false info you want.  So what you are saying is that Dr.HHH is incorrect in his above statement. But you should advise DR.HHH that he is incorrect.

[Ronnie99]

Teak: This is getting tedious. What you posted is not correct. The PCR RNA viral load test is the only one of the two used for treatment as it measures viral load, which is a key measure needed in treatment of HIV+ people. The PCR proviral DNA test is not used in treatment, its only use is for diagnosis. I think what you are missing is you think that just because a test is not FDA approved for HIV diagnosis, that means the test is not diagnostic in nature. That is not the case. The only use of the PCR proviral DNA test is for diagnosis, whether it is approved for that use by the FDA or not. This is my last post in this thread. If anyone is unsure about what these tests do, just look them up on the web and you will see what I post is accurate.

[Teak]

Ronnie like you did in the other forums. If you would read and comprehend what you've read, then you would be better off. PCR RNA is the only approved PCR dianostic test. PCR DNA in not a dianostic test it is a monitoring test for people that have already been confirmed positive and it's used to monitor their viral load. I get the darn test every three months so don't try to pull your **** on me or anyone else on this forum.

Now post your url's that says different.

05.10.2006 22:10
Gen-Probe Receives FDA Approval for APTIMA(R) HIV-1 RNA Qualitative Assay for Clinical Diagnostic Use

http://www.finanznachrichten.de/nachrichten-2006-10/artikel-7097687.asp

Gen-Probe Receives FDA Approval for APTIMA(R) HIV-1 RNA Qualitative Assay for Clinical Diagnostic Use

PRNewswire - October 5, 2006
Gen-Probe Receives FDA Approval for APTIMA(R) HIV-1 RNA Qualitative Assay for Clinical Diagnostic Use

Gen-Probe
http://www.gen-probe.com/pdfs/pi/500238-ARTRevA.pdf