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!

[o_g]

If PCR DNA test is not a diagnostic test then why is it even on market(in specialized path labs) for sale. Will it be correct to say that these labs are fooling people? Why do pathologists, microbiologists give it a high regard as a diagnostic test calling it extremely sensitive. On the other hand, its PCR RNA which is not a diagnostic test as it is meant to check the viral load and do not deal in YES/NO answer. It's just so confusing and is there anything which is completely believable about HIV infection(from window period to diagnostic tests). When, we talk about 4th generation tests being almost conclusive at 6 weeks, why can't we have a combination of DNA PCR and antibody test at 6 weeks and get more reliable results. I suppose DNA PCR is more sensitive than P24 antigen test. A P24 antigen test sensitivity varies anywhere from 60-80 % and PCR DNA sensitivity is supposed to be 96% after 28 days. This all is just too varied information and can send anyone's head for a spin. There are too many factors which come along with HIV related information(financial gains for test providers, CYA attitude, mixed information regarding window period, testing strategies). Seems everyone is just exploiting fear of HIV and nobody is really bothered to to give correct/complete information varying from window period to testing strategies. seems everyone has an agenda. Superficially, it looks that everyone cares to bring and end to this disease in the world and working hard but if you go by the actions and information present in ground reality...then only God can help...

[Teak]

You get a postive result on any viral infection at the blood center, the unit will be tossed and you'll get a letter from the blood bank. A false positive will also get the unit tossed.

[Ronnie99]

Teak: You did not read my post. Your original quote which I was referring to was the following: "PCR DNA test are not diagnostic tests." That statement you made is simply not accurate. The PCR DNA test, whether FDA approved or not has only one puspose, and that is for diagnosis of HIV. It is not a viral load test like the PCR RNA viral load test is, it is a test that tells you whether HIV was detected or not detected. That is a diagnostic test. Now, if you are discussing FDA approval, which is not something I brought up, then go ahead. That was not what I had responded to.

[Teak]

There you go talking about something you don't know anything about.

Now here is someone that does know what he's talking about in reference to PCR DNA tests.

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

[Ronnie99]

Teak: The test that is used for treatment of HIV positive individuals to monitor their disease status is the PCR RNA viral load test. This test is used for treatment because it measures the LEVEL of virus in a person's system. That is the test used routinely in HIV treatment settings. The PCR proviral DNA test is not a viral load test so it has no use in HIV treatment monitoring as the PCR RNA viral load test does (since it is already known that hte patients are HIV+). The PCR proviral DNA test is a diagnostic test that simply tells whether HIV was detected or not (there is no viral load reporting in this test). The PCR proviral DNA test is used for, amongst other things to:

Test newborns for HIV
Test rape victims for HIV infection very soon after the rape in many states
Test actors in the american adult entertainment industry for HIV

Both types of PCR tests can be used for diagnosis, but the only purpose of the PCR proviral DNA test is for diagnostic purposes (and for testing blood donations).

[Teak]

Ronnie the **** you are dish out here is the same reason you got a timeout on AidsMeds. False Information. Lets let the ww read your posts on AidsMeds and let them see if you are qualified to give out any advice.