Why the study?
The laboratory diagnosis of antiviral resistance is quickly changing due to new drug availability, older drug sunsetting, novel technologies, rapid viral evolution, and clinical laboratory financial and logistic pressures.
Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Mini-review
Offers 2024 US reference for antiviral resistance testing; leaves open standardization amid evolving methods.
The laboratory diagnosis of antiviral resistance is a quickly changing field due to new drug availability, the sunsetting of older drugs, the development of novel technologies, rapid viral evolution, and the financial/logistic pressures of the clinical laboratory. This mini-review summarizes the current state of clinically available antiviral resistance testing in the United States in 2024, covering the most commonly used test methods, mechanisms, and clinical indications for herpes simplex virus, cytomegalovirus, human immunodeficiency virus, influenza, hepatitis B virus, and hepatitis C virus drug resistance testing. Common themes include the move away from phenotypic to genotypic methods for first-line clinical testing, as well as uncertainty surrounding the clinical meaningfulness of minority variant detection as next-generation sequencing methods have become more commonplace.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hannah Wang (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: