All over the planet, women are getting pregnant, over 200 million of them each year. Most of these pregnancies are unintended1. This means two things: a lot of babies, and a lot of surprises. Despite this, some 8% of couples are unable to conceive within two years and are considered infertile. Risk factors for infertility include age, previous medical history (sexually-transmitted diseases, cancer treatment) and obesity. 

Fortunately, a wide-range of fertility treatments are now available, although sadly the cost of such treatment is prohibitive for many. Despite this, for those who can access it fertility treatment does work; in the UK the Human Fertility and Embryology Authority reported ~20,000 births in 2016 from ~68,000 treatment cycles.

Much of the success in fertility treatment stems from the use of medications that seek to address fertility issues in individual patients. While this is welcome news, as the number of fertility treatments increases and their use becomes more widespread there is a need for diagnostic test manufacturers to ensure that the tests they develop give the right results in patients taking fertility drugs.

For example, low levels of Progesterone early in pregnancy can be suggestive of increased risk of miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy. A patient with a low result for Progesterone levels may be treated in order to manage this situation and reduce the likelihood of miscarriage or to confirm and manage an ectopic pregnancy. If such patients are also being treated with Clom1fene – not an unlikely scenario for a patient in the early stages of pregnancy – then it would be important to know that the Progesterone test result is not interfered with by the presence of Clom1fene in the patient. Therefore, there is a need within the disease diagnosis industry for material from patients treated with fertility drugs to ensure that diagnostic tests being developed are not interfered with.

During immunoassay development, diagnostic test manufacturers typically test their assays for specificity. They construct a list of potential cross-reacting molecules, and then spike these on an individual basis into human specimens that do not contain the analyte of interest (e.g. Progesterone). They would then test the specimens in the assay to see if any “Progesterone” was detected, expecting a value of zero if the cross-reactant does not interfere with the assay.

Let’s now review some of the drugs used in fertility, all of which have the potential to interfere with diagnostic assays. Logical Biological can provide plasma and serum from individuals in every stage of pregnancy (0-40 gestation weeks) and those treated with medications covered in this article. Do let us know if this would be of interest to your organisation.

Drugs which stimulate ovulation

Clom1fene* (brand name: Clom1d) – a commonly used drug which stimulates ovulation by causing the pituitary gland to release more Follicle-Stimulating Hormone (FSH) and Luteinising Hormone (LH), which it does by blocking estrogen receptors. This stimulates the growth of an ovarian follicle containing an egg.

Gonadotropins – FSH, LH or human Chorionic Gonadotrophin (hCG) strongly stimulate the ovary directly to mature and release eggs. These hormones can be used individually or in combination and are administered by injection. Brand names of this type of drug include Gonal-F, Follistim AQ, Bravelle, Menopur, Ovidrel and Pregnyl.

Metformin (brand names include Glucophage) is used when insulin is the suspected underlying cause of infertility. Metformin helps improve insulin resistance and thus increases the likelihood of ovulation.

Letrozole (brand name: Fermara) is an aromatase inhibitor, developed for use in treating breast cancer, which also serves to stimulate ovulation by decreasing the amount of testosterone converted to estradiol. This reduces estrogen activity and leads to more FSH secretion.  

Bromocriptine and cabergoline (brand names: Parlodol and Dostinex) are dopamine agonists which can be used where ovulation problems, such as irregular or absent ovulation, are caused by excess production of prolactin by the pituitary gland (hyperprolactinemia).

Drugs which suppress ovulation

Some drugs are actually used by fertility clinics to suppress ovulation. This could be to prevent ovulation before the eggs can be retrieved surgically for IVF use. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists achieve this and examples include ganirelix acetate and cetrorelix acetate. Brand names include Antagon, Ganirelix, Cetrotide and Orgalutran.

Other fertility medications are GnRH agonists. These stimulate FSH and LH production but then cause the body to stop producing them, allowing control of ovulation.  Examples are leuprolide acetate, nafarelin acetate, buserelin and goserelin. These are manufactured under brand names including Lupron, Synarel, Suprecur and Zoladex, which variously may be delivered to the patient by nasal spray, implant or injection.

Other Drugs

Birth control pills (contraceptive pills) may also be used by fertility clinics to enhance response to Clom1d of women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Progesterone may be prescribed for luteal phase defects or recurrent miscarriages. Estrogen may be prescribed to alleviate a symptom of Clom1d, which is a thicker endometrial lining that can interfere with conception.

Conclusions

As technology advances there is a strong trend towards increased uptake of fertility treatments. Diagnostics immunoassay developers should continue to include fertility drugs in their cross-reactivity studies to determine the specificity of their assays.

References

  1. Global, regional, and subregional trends in unintended pregnancy and its outcomes from 1990 to 2014: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model. Bearak J, Popinchalk A, Alkema L, Sedgh G. Lancet Glob Health. 2018 Apr;6(4):e380-e389.

This article should be viewed for general interest purposes only, may not be fully accurate or comprehensive, and should not be considered as medical advice.
*Spelling altered for SEO reasons

Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) has a reputation for being difficult to treat, although advances in medicine have reached a level where those being treated can be expected to live almost to their full life span. However, as we shall see in this article, current HIV testing is not perfect and many challenges remain.

There are multiple HIV viruses

HIV is actually a small family of distinct viruses comprised of HIV1 and HIV2. HIV1 accounts for 95% of worldwide HIV infections, while HIV2 is largely concentrated in West Africa. The two viruses are genetically related yet clearly distinct; HIV2 is less infectious than HIV1 and progresses more slowly. The two viruses also respond differently to some drug therapies; for example, HIV2 is less responsive than HIV1 to enfuvirtide and non-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors. Nevertheless, it is essential that any medical diagnostic test can detect both viruses.

Further complicating matters, within HIV1 there are many different, i.e. genetically distinct, virus subtypes, some of which are extremely rare. How can HIV disease diagnosis test manufacturer ensure their test detect HIV1 subtype N when only a handful of such infections have ever been recorded? Clearly, the patient material needed to check that subtype N is detected cannot be readily available.

HIV Strains and Subtypes

Diagnosing newly-infected patients

One convenient and successful way of diagnosing HIV antibodies is to look for evidence of an immune response in the patient, i.e. does the patient’s blood contain antibodies raised against HIV? Human IgM and IgG anti-HIV antibodies can be readily detected using HIV antigens, typically in the form of synthesised peptides or recombinant proteins. But what if the patient has only just become infected and has not yet developed an immune response to the virus?

If such patients are only tested for antibodies to HIV they could receive a negative test result and then unknowingly go on to infect other individuals. It would be ideal to be able to effectively diagnose newly infected patients and this is why HIV p24 antigen tests are used. p24 is an abundant protein within HIV, making up most of the viral core. Unfortunately, although p24 is detectable earlier than the patient’s antibody response, p24 is not immediately present at detectable levels in the patient; there is still a “window” of time where a newly infected individual will test negative.

Post-infection timeline for HIV component detectability

Different patients, different responses

Each type of HIV test has a known post-infection time window during which it cannot be expected to detect HIV in patients. However, there is a strong intra-patient variation when each test becomes positive. As an example, Hurt et al. (2017)1 noted that 4th generation tests (inclusive of p24 testing) are positive for 50% of infected individuals at day 17.8, 75% at day 23.6 and 99% at day 44.3. This is why it is so important to test each patient for a battery of different viral and host components, as in 4th generation testing, as some components may be absent in a given patient.

Post-infection HIV and host components – typical levels & timeline

Access to Patient Material

The disease diagnosis community needs ready access to HIV patient material for use in assay development, assay calibration and quality control of HIV tests. Different strains, subtypes, ages, genders and stages of infection may be required. Companies such as Logical Biological specialise in this area, working directly with donor collection centres.

Niche scenarios

Babies carry their mother’s antibodies for the first months of their lives so tests to detect antibodies in the babies blood would be expected to be positive even if the baby is not infected. In this not so unusual scenario of a baby being born to a HIV-infected mother, as well as a few others, a test for Viral Load may be beneficial. Viral load tests for HIV use Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) to amplify HIV RNA if present in the blood. These tests are complex and expensive to perform, and no tests of this type have been approved for diagnostic use by the FDA.

Presence of HIV in donated blood

Donated blood products could be infectious, as some donators are not aware that they are infected. While individuals at high-risk of infection are discouraged from donating, clearly there is a risk of infection being spread through donated blood and this is mitigated by testing all such blood for a number of different infectious diseases. The National Health Service in the UK tests all donated blood for Syphilis, Hepatitis B (HBV), Hepatitis C (HCV), Hepatitis E (HEV), Human T Lymphotrophic Virus and (HTLV)5.

Some other infections are tested for in addition depending on the donator’s individual circumstances. Donated blood is typically tested using the RT-PCR method. Worryingly perhaps, this test is also not perfect; the risk of spreading infection through donated blood cannot be eliminated entirely. Patients won’t be positive for the HIV viral load test until a few days post-infection, and the time-window is even a few days longer where patient material is pooled, and thus diluted.

Self-testing & In-Field Testing

Not every unknowingly infected HIV patient would be willing to go to a clinic to get tested, even if they understand they are at high-risk and fear they might be infected. Partially addressing this problem, a market has developed around self-testing of HIV at home, and it is now straightforward to buy such tests from any self-respecting online retail giant.

Alternatively, imagine a remote rural location in a country with limited healthcare infrastructure – individuals might not be able to get to a clinic even if they wanted to. It is up to governments, regulators and assay developers to adapt to this need and by doing so they will improve the protection of the public and make a contribution to alleviating the HIV epidemic. It is noted that in one of the worse affected countries – South Africa – 90% of people living with HIV are now aware of their status, up from 66% in 20146; progress is being made.

Conclusions

The disease diagnosis community has made great strides in improving HIV detection. However, many challenges remain owing to the biology of the virus and its human hosts, human behaviour and the individual circumstances of those infected. Future trends are likely to see an increase in home/self-testing and movement towards 5th generation assays which give individual results for HIV1, HIV2 and p24 in the initial test providing valuable information to determine the most appropriate treatment for the particular individual.

References:

  1. Selecting an HIV Test: A Narrative Review for Clinicians and Researchers. Hurt CB, Nelson JAE, Hightow-Weidman LB, Miller WC. Sex Transm Dis. 2017 Dec;44(12):739-746.
  2. Human anti-HIV IgM detection by the OraQuick ADVANCE® Rapid HIV 1/2 Antibody Test. Guillon
    G
    , Yearwood G, Snipes C, Boschi D, Reed MR. PeerJ. 2018 Feb 28;6
  3. Dynamics of HIV viremia and antibody seroconversion in plasma donors: implications for diagnosis and staging of primary HIV infection. Fiebig EW, Wright DJ, Rawal BD, Garrett PE, Schumacher RT, Peddada L, Heldebrant C, Smith R, Conrad A, Kleinman SH, Busch MP. AIDS. 2003 Sep 5;17(13):1871-9.
  4. Assessment of the Ability of a Fourth-Generation Immunoassay for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Antibody and p24 Antigen to Detect both Acute and Recent HIV Infections in a High-Risk Setting. J Clin Microbiol. 2009 Aug; 47(8): 2639–2642. Mark W. Pandori, John Hackett, Jr., Brian Louie, Ana Vallari, Teri Dowling, Sally Liska, Jeffrey D. Klausner.
  5. https://www.blood.co.uk/the-donation-process/further-information/tests-we-carry-out/
  6. https://www.avert.org/professionals/hiv-around-world/sub-saharan-africa/south-africa
  7. https://www.avert.org/professionals/hiv-science/types-strains