iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

OraQuick, Take-Home HIV Test, Backed By FDA Panel

By MATTHEW PERRONE 05/15/12 07:32 PM ET AP

Oraquick

WASHINGTON -- American consumers may soon be able to test themselves for the virus that causes AIDS in the privacy of their own homes, after a panel of experts on Tuesday recommended approval of the first rapid, over-the-counter HIV test.

The 17 members of the Food and Drug Administration advisory panel voted unanimously that the benefits of the OraQuick HIV test outweigh its potential risks for consumers. While the test, which uses a mouth swab to return a result in 20 minutes, does not appear to be as accurate as professionally-administered diagnostics, panelists said it could provide an important way to expand HIV testing.

The FDA will make its final decision on whether to approve the product later this year, weighing the opinion of the panel.

Government officials estimate one-fifth, or about 240,000 people, of the 1.2 million HIV carriers in the U.S. are not aware they are infected. Testing is one of the chief means of slowing new infections, which have held steady at about 50,000 per year for two decades.

Based in Bethlehem, Pa., Orasure has marketed a version of OraQuick to doctors, nurses and other health care practitioners since 2004. When used by professionals, the test is shown to accurately identify both carriers and non-carriers 99 percent of the time.

But a trial conducted by the company showed the home test only correctly detected HIV in those carrying the virus 93 percent of the time. The FDA estimated the test would miss about 3,800 HIV-positive people per year, while correctly identifying 45,000, if approved for U.S. consumers. The test could prevent 4,000 new transmissions of the virus annually, though the figure could vary depending on how many people purchase the test. While it's not clear why the test was less accurate in consumer trials, company researchers said they expected the test's sensitivity to drop when used by consumers versus professionals.

Panelists stressed that the test's labeling should state that a negative reading does not automatically mean the person does not have HIV, because of imperfect results. Panelists also stressed the importance of a toll-free number to put those who test positive in touch with counseling and medical care.

Despite concerns about less-than-perfect use by the public, the panel overwhelmingly sided with more than two dozen HIV advocates and doctors, who said the test represents a step forward in combating the virus.

"Over-the-counter testing has the potential to reach a far greater number of people who want to know their HIV status on their own terms," said Tom Donohue, founder of HIV awareness group Who's Positive.

"We are always looking for game changers, and we believe this is one of them," said Carl Schmid, deputy director of the AIDS Institute. "Not only will it help reduce the number of infections but it will bring more people into care and treatment."

Tuesday's meeting was the second time in less than a week that FDA advisers recommended approval of a novel medical product to slow the spread of HIV. Last Thursday a similar panel of drug experts endorsed the HIV daily pill Truvada for preventive use. If FDA follows the group's advice, the daily medication will become the first drug approved to prevent healthy people from becoming infected with the virus.

The FDA has already approved other HIV test kits designed to be used at home, although those kits – which require a blood sample – must be sent to a laboratory for development. Orasure executives argue that a test that can be done at home will appeal to a much broader group of people.

FDA officials said it is impossible to predict how widely the test would be used, but it would be most effective in the hands of people at high risk of acquiring the virus, including men who have sex with men.

A recent survey of gay and bisexual men cited by public health officials found that 84 percent would test themselves more frequently if they could buy an over-the-counter HIV test.

Orasure sells its professional version of the test for $17.50, though company executives declined to discuss how they would price the consumer version.

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HEALTHY LIVING

WASHINGTON -- American consumers may soon be able to test themselves for the virus that causes AIDS in the privacy of their own homes, after a panel of experts on Tuesday recommended approval of the f...
WASHINGTON -- American consumers may soon be able to test themselves for the virus that causes AIDS in the privacy of their own homes, after a panel of experts on Tuesday recommended approval of the f...
Filed by Jessica Cumberbatch Anderson  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 53
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
01:07 AM on 05/22/2012
As a med tech who works for a medical facility I would like to say that New Jersey has a program that monitors rapid HIV testing that also has sites that are rapid/rapid (initial rapid tests that are preliminary positive and confirming with another rapid test) connecting patients to same day care; and is quite successful. For more info visit www.njhiv1.org
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
jettymichael
Unwavering Truth!
08:40 PM on 05/16/2012
70000 new cases every year. In this age one should be aware of the prevalence of the disease and take necessary precautions.
The test works as far as fidelity exist yet infidelity is the reason for the spread of the disease.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BacSi
Celer, Silens, Mortalis
10:22 AM on 05/17/2012
Unprotected sex with people you have no idea about their status is the reason for the spread.

IV drug use is the reason for the spread.

It does not mean giving up sex with others----even many others----it means following the CDC safe sex guidelines
11:48 AM on 05/17/2012
Celibacy outside of a committed relationship is an option as well. It might not be for everybody, but it is definitely not an option that should be overlooked. We are not animals, and we are quite capable of controlling ourselves, despite what the MSM tries to tell us.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:10 PM on 05/16/2012
My question is can a law suit be filed against the US department of health and any govt&private organization that kept a drug that could have prevented the spread of aids/hiv over 2 decades ago but chose not and only provided the preventive medicine to wealthy, majority white victims?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BacSi
Celer, Silens, Mortalis
01:52 PM on 05/17/2012
I wonder if you could file a lawsuit against the far to many gay (MSM) sex venues that do not insist on safe sex and condoms?

Over 2 decades we have know how to prevent HIV among the MSM community in the US and there are popular gay web sites where you can still request a night of Party and Play (meth) and you can call for one and all for a GB without condoms.

Gay baths or sex clubs that do not require safe sex.

There is a lot of blame if blame is what you are after.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:03 PM on 05/22/2012
I'm look at the folks with the actual ability to have stopped it on a major level. There's always going to be a dummy that knows better but won't do better, however when a collective group of our brightest and best PRODUCE something so significant that could prevent millions or infection and death worldwide but CHOOSE ONLY to give to the wealthy, there is a serious serious problem. That drug/cocktail/shot etc should have been as easily given as the flu shot at your local Walgreens/CVS/Target pharmacy. There is NO reason it should've been withheld regardless of a persons lifestyle, lack of intelligence, color, age, sex or creed. And there should be a lawsuit against all that chose to deny making that drug available to the general public.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
William Munny
04:41 PM on 05/16/2012
I'm curious, when is the last time anyone has known someone PERSONALLY who has died of AIDS since say, 2005? I'm not talking about diagnosed with HIV, but died of AIDS. I don't write this question to be insensitive or glib, but just as a means to raise a discussion. Personally, as part of the Black community, where HIV is supposedly most prevelant, I can honestly say I have not personally experienced a death associated with HIV/AIDS since its height in the mid 90's. Just curious about the experience of others.
wmad
Let's have a civil, respectful debate
04:32 AM on 05/17/2012
Well, they've developed ways to treat it that dramatically increase the lifespan of those who have AIDS. So yeah, recently, far fewer people have been dying from it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
meeks
Perfectly my flawed self at all times
10:02 AM on 05/17/2012
Just FYI no offense meant but no one dies from AIDS. They die from the infections and diseases that occur from having a suppressed immune system.

To answer your question, yes. But I also work in a field where I interact with individuals that are poor and HIV positive. And yes, I have seen them at the end. There are a whole lot of factors that contribute to why they don't survive but there are still people dying younger then they should.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BacSi
Celer, Silens, Mortalis
12:07 PM on 05/16/2012
Having worked in or later run STD clinics I always would want to see in clinic testing

But the fact is a lot of folks will just not make that trip.

So the question is-----are they better off knowing their status while being at home?

What happens after a person knows they are neg or poz?

What happens as far as RX?

What happens as far as safe sex or no safe sex,

More sex or less sex?

Having sex with more people or less people?

We may have guesses. I doubt we know for sure..

If you do know for sure-----then I expect a link to vetted data.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
meeks
Perfectly my flawed self at all times
10:06 AM on 05/17/2012
Being a social worker that works with this population, I had some to the same questions as you did. With the mobile testing sites, at least you have someone there who will help you follow up after someone gets a + test. If you are at home and there is no one there with you....it can get bad for some individuals. Denial and anger will drive people act out. I get why home test should be an option but I wonder what the outcome will be.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BacSi
Celer, Silens, Mortalis
10:37 AM on 05/17/2012
People usually never want to go to a STD clinic if they can avoid it.

But if you do get a DX of GC, or syphilis, or HIV the best thing you may have at your side is a trained public health worker.

I can't count the number of people I was able to put at ease, put them on the road to taking care of their DX, and or end up saving their relationship or marriage.

As well as getting the people in their life tested and or treated without anyone including the wife or husband or lover knowing who had exposed them.

It was my job to tell them they were exposed. I was never going to tell them who had exposed them.

Sometimes you really are better off with a professional.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
geddy lee is a god
New playlist: Cesaria Evora, B-52s, and Jeff Beck
10:55 AM on 05/16/2012
I can appreciate the modernization and convenience of this HIV testing technology, but the model of DIY testing bothers me.

If someone receives an inaccurate result, there's no telling how that person may react. They could contemplate suicide or start thinking about revenge against the person who may have infected him/her. This entire process could be emotionally confusing.

I support HIV testing at a public health department (or a health department-sponsored community health event), HIV/AIDS advocacy center, and physicians' offices. In a clinical setting, there will be HIV Counselors and Medical Social Workers on staff to assist the person regardless of what the results turn out to be.

I can agree with the clinicians and health professionals who support the idea of a home HIV test because it will encourage more people to know their status. But there are too many "what if" scenarios involved for people who attempt this process alone.
10:54 AM on 05/16/2012
wondering... why this is in black voices???
compro01
Conservatism : Policy-based evidence making
12:24 PM on 05/16/2012
Presumably as African-Americans represent a disproportionate percentage of HIV cases.
12:53 PM on 05/16/2012
I'm sure you're right. I just look at it more as a societal problem, not just "blacks" or "gays."  Although those two groups may be disproportionately impacted, they are not the only groups who will have to deal with the it. The world is a much smaller place.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BacSi
Celer, Silens, Mortalis
12:39 PM on 05/16/2012
It is in the gay section and the black section for the same reason.

The % or # of DX of HIV in the US from those groups or communities.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:15 PM on 05/16/2012
But moviepate101 makes a good point. Is it just a gay&black concern or something the entire USA should be priviy to reading? If AIDs/HIv is something other racial groups and heterosexuals shouldn't be informed on then tell me why? How is it that this virus only makes it's way within two communities to the point all others are protected?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
William Munny
09:49 AM on 05/16/2012
I suggest people go on youtube and look at the documentary, "House of Numbers". It will give you a differnt perspective on HIV/AIDS.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BacSi
Celer, Silens, Mortalis
12:47 PM on 05/16/2012
"Leung manages to present a barrage of intriguing theories debunking our generally accepted beliefs… "

Not scientific data. Not science that can be backed by the scientific community. But intriguing theories.

Sort of like----the earth is really flat.

A film made by someone who refuses to say who funded his project that goes on to state that AIDS does not exist.

And then gets blasted by virtually everyone this side of the total wack jobs.

A different perspective indeed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
William Munny
03:30 PM on 05/16/2012
Without getting into a debate, the people who were interviewed in the film were Nobel laureate scientists, high level officials within the CDC, WHO, investigative reporters, etc. Frankly, the entire HIV/AIDS theory is based on "not scientific data".

If you want to discredit the film then do it based on the documentation it presents, the timeline of the discovery of HIV/AIDS, the irregularties it exposes with regards to testing for the virius, the reporting of numbers from health organizations, and testimony from those who were diagnosed with the "disease" in the early 90's, chose to not take medication, and are walking around today feeling fine.
07:27 PM on 05/16/2012
there are documentaries that are a lot deeper than 'house of numers'.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
William Munny
11:44 PM on 05/16/2012
I'm sure, but the film was done well because it's not overly complex. This society doesn't like to think too much.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BacSi
Celer, Silens, Mortalis
09:16 AM on 05/16/2012
I'm not convinced it's a good idea. All tests like this are fallable, and there is an increased likelihood of the test being done incorrectly under domestic conditions. The consequences of a "wrong" result could be devastating. Plus, a person obtaining a result indicating they've been in contact with the HIV virus may react very emotionally to the news and need considerable and immediate counselling and support. I think these tests are better undertaken under the auspices of professional sexual health clinics or by dedicated voluntary organisations where such emotional and psychological support is available if needed. Otherwise, one can envisage the likely tragic outcomes, such as increasing numbers of suicide attempts.
photo
LintLass
"When you can balance a tackhammer on your head...
09:39 AM on 05/16/2012
I'll agree the dangers of a false positive can be pretty terrible, (One of my gay male friends had a false positive once back when the tests were less-reliable, and was absolutely *ashen* for a month or two till the next one came up negative: Really kind of hit the bottle and, well, he was expecting to be dead soon, Wasn't pretty. )

But, the article doesn't say whether or not false positives are a significant risk, still, it should probably most definitely caution "If this comes up positive, see a doctor immediately before flipping out." I actually used to hang out with quite a number of gay guys: never actually lost a friend to the disease, but I definitely remember the fear in their eyes and stuff.
08:58 AM on 05/17/2012
I was thinking about false negatives too - sometimes when a relationship starts and a gay couple agree to be monogamous with each other, they each have a HIV test to esure one will not infect the other. If one of them belives he is negative when in fact he is not....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
geddy lee is a god
New playlist: Cesaria Evora, B-52s, and Jeff Beck
10:56 AM on 05/16/2012
I just posted something similar to this. It looks like we were both thinking along the same lines.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CgGardner
Queer Southern Gentleman
08:56 AM on 05/16/2012
Wow. How times have changed, so glad that there continues to be developments in this arena. Hope that with the ease/convenience of this, more people will consider getting themselves tested.