Screening for the Presence of a Disease by Pooling Sera Samples

Abstract Screening of pooled urine samples was suggested during the Second World War as a method for reducing the cost of detecting syphilis in U.S. soldiers. Recently, pooling has been used in screening for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antibody to help curb the further spread of the virus. Pooling reduces the cost but also—and probably more importantly—offers a feasible way to lower the error rates associated with labeling samples when screening low-risk HIV populations. For example, given the limited precision of the presently available test kits, when the screened population has a prevalence of 4 per 1,000 (which is roughly the estimated U.S. prevalence), the probability that a sample labeled positive is antibody-free can be reduced from approximately 90% (if each sample is tested individually) to about 2%. Furthermore, screening pooled sera samples can also be used to reduce the probability that a sample labeled negative in fact has antibodies up to 40-fold in such a population—an important cons...

[1]  P. Billingsley,et al.  Probability and Measure , 1980 .

[2]  T. Quinn,et al.  Successful use of pooled sera to determine HIV-1 seroprevalence in Zaire with development of cost-efficiency models. , 1990, AIDS.

[3]  Just Doctoring: Medical Ethics in the Liberal State , 1991 .

[4]  R. Detels,et al.  Significance of quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) results in evaluation of three ELISAs and Western blot tests for detection of antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus in a high-risk population , 1987, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[5]  G. Ozanne,et al.  Performance and reliability of five commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits in screening for anti-human immunodeficiency virus antibody in high-risk subjects , 1988, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[6]  M. Angell A dual approach to the AIDS epidemic. , 1991, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  S G Pauker,et al.  Screening for HIV: can we afford the false positive rate? , 1987, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  R. Dorfman The Detection of Defective Members of Large Populations , 1943 .

[9]  X M Tu,et al.  Issues in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) screening programs. , 1992, American journal of epidemiology.

[10]  S Zeger,et al.  Evaluation of human immunodeficiency virus seroprevalence in population surveys using pooled sera , 1989, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[11]  Patrick Billingsley,et al.  Probability and Measure. , 1986 .

[12]  Samuel Kotz,et al.  Dorfman-sterrett screening (group testing) schemes and the effects of faulty inspection , 1989 .

[13]  J. Groopman,et al.  Lack of evidence of prolonged human immunodeficiency virus infection before antibody seroconversion. , 1988, Blood.

[14]  R. Redfield,et al.  Measurement of the false positive rate in a screening program for human immunodeficiency virus infections. , 1988, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  S. Ross A First Course in Probability , 1977 .

[16]  Peter Bacchetti,et al.  Incubation period of AIDS in San Francisco , 1989, Nature.

[17]  Milton Sobel,et al.  Group testing with a new goal, estimation , 1975 .

[18]  H. Fineberg,et al.  Compulsory premarital screening for the human immunodeficiency virus. Technical and public health considerations. , 1987, JAMA.

[19]  J. Esparza,et al.  World Health Organization quality assessment programme on HIV testing. , 1990, AIDS.

[20]  J. Gaudino,et al.  Sensitivity and specificity of pooled versus individual sera in a human immunodeficiency virus antibody prevalence study , 1989, Journal of clinical microbiology.