Cargando…

WHO Multicenter Evaluation of FACSCount CD4 and Pima CD4 T-Cell Count Systems: Instrument Performance and Misclassification of HIV-Infected Patients

BACKGROUND: CD4(+) T-cell counts are used to screen and follow-up HIV-infected patients during treatment. As part of the World Health Organization prequalification program of diagnostics, we conducted an independent multicenter evaluation of the FACSCount CD4 and the Pima CD4, using the FACSCalibur...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wade, Djibril, Daneau, Géraldine, Aboud, Said, Vercauteren, Gaby H., Urassa, Willy S. K., Kestens, Luc
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4149645/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24853304
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0000000000000214
_version_ 1782332799046385664
author Wade, Djibril
Daneau, Géraldine
Aboud, Said
Vercauteren, Gaby H.
Urassa, Willy S. K.
Kestens, Luc
author_facet Wade, Djibril
Daneau, Géraldine
Aboud, Said
Vercauteren, Gaby H.
Urassa, Willy S. K.
Kestens, Luc
author_sort Wade, Djibril
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: CD4(+) T-cell counts are used to screen and follow-up HIV-infected patients during treatment. As part of the World Health Organization prequalification program of diagnostics, we conducted an independent multicenter evaluation of the FACSCount CD4 and the Pima CD4, using the FACSCalibur as reference method. METHODS: A total of 440 paired capillary and venous blood samples were collected from HIV-infected patients attending the HIV outpatient clinic in Antwerp, Belgium, and the HIV care and treatment center in Dar es Salam, Tanzania. Capillary blood was run on Pima analyzer, whereas venous blood was analyzed on FACSCount, Pima, and FACSCalibur instruments. Precision and agreement between methods were assessed. RESULTS: The FACSCount CD4 results were in agreement with the FACSCalibur results with relative bias of 0.4% and 3.1% on absolute CD4 counts and an absolute bias of −0.6% and −1.1% on CD4% in Antwerp and Dar es Salam, respectively. The Pima CD4 results were in agreement with the FACSCalibur results with relative bias of −4.1% and −9.4% using venous blood and of −9.5% and −0.9% using capillary blood in Antwerp and Dar es Salam, respectively. At the threshold of 350 cells per microliter, the FACSCount CD4 and Pima CD4 using venous and capillary blood misclassified 7%, 9%, and 13% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The FACSCount CD4 provides reliable CD4 counts and CD4% and is suitable for monitoring adult and pediatric HIV patients in moderate-volume settings. The Pima CD4 is more suitable for screening eligible adult HIV patients for antiretroviral treatment initiation in low-volume laboratories.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4149645
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41496452014-09-10 WHO Multicenter Evaluation of FACSCount CD4 and Pima CD4 T-Cell Count Systems: Instrument Performance and Misclassification of HIV-Infected Patients Wade, Djibril Daneau, Géraldine Aboud, Said Vercauteren, Gaby H. Urassa, Willy S. K. Kestens, Luc J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Implementation and Operational Research: Clinical Science BACKGROUND: CD4(+) T-cell counts are used to screen and follow-up HIV-infected patients during treatment. As part of the World Health Organization prequalification program of diagnostics, we conducted an independent multicenter evaluation of the FACSCount CD4 and the Pima CD4, using the FACSCalibur as reference method. METHODS: A total of 440 paired capillary and venous blood samples were collected from HIV-infected patients attending the HIV outpatient clinic in Antwerp, Belgium, and the HIV care and treatment center in Dar es Salam, Tanzania. Capillary blood was run on Pima analyzer, whereas venous blood was analyzed on FACSCount, Pima, and FACSCalibur instruments. Precision and agreement between methods were assessed. RESULTS: The FACSCount CD4 results were in agreement with the FACSCalibur results with relative bias of 0.4% and 3.1% on absolute CD4 counts and an absolute bias of −0.6% and −1.1% on CD4% in Antwerp and Dar es Salam, respectively. The Pima CD4 results were in agreement with the FACSCalibur results with relative bias of −4.1% and −9.4% using venous blood and of −9.5% and −0.9% using capillary blood in Antwerp and Dar es Salam, respectively. At the threshold of 350 cells per microliter, the FACSCount CD4 and Pima CD4 using venous and capillary blood misclassified 7%, 9%, and 13% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The FACSCount CD4 provides reliable CD4 counts and CD4% and is suitable for monitoring adult and pediatric HIV patients in moderate-volume settings. The Pima CD4 is more suitable for screening eligible adult HIV patients for antiretroviral treatment initiation in low-volume laboratories. JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 2014-08-15 2014-07-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4149645/ /pubmed/24853304 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0000000000000214 Text en Copyright © 2014 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial No Derivative 3.0 License, which permits downloading and sharing the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.
spellingShingle Implementation and Operational Research: Clinical Science
Wade, Djibril
Daneau, Géraldine
Aboud, Said
Vercauteren, Gaby H.
Urassa, Willy S. K.
Kestens, Luc
WHO Multicenter Evaluation of FACSCount CD4 and Pima CD4 T-Cell Count Systems: Instrument Performance and Misclassification of HIV-Infected Patients
title WHO Multicenter Evaluation of FACSCount CD4 and Pima CD4 T-Cell Count Systems: Instrument Performance and Misclassification of HIV-Infected Patients
title_full WHO Multicenter Evaluation of FACSCount CD4 and Pima CD4 T-Cell Count Systems: Instrument Performance and Misclassification of HIV-Infected Patients
title_fullStr WHO Multicenter Evaluation of FACSCount CD4 and Pima CD4 T-Cell Count Systems: Instrument Performance and Misclassification of HIV-Infected Patients
title_full_unstemmed WHO Multicenter Evaluation of FACSCount CD4 and Pima CD4 T-Cell Count Systems: Instrument Performance and Misclassification of HIV-Infected Patients
title_short WHO Multicenter Evaluation of FACSCount CD4 and Pima CD4 T-Cell Count Systems: Instrument Performance and Misclassification of HIV-Infected Patients
title_sort who multicenter evaluation of facscount cd4 and pima cd4 t-cell count systems: instrument performance and misclassification of hiv-infected patients
topic Implementation and Operational Research: Clinical Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4149645/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24853304
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0000000000000214
work_keys_str_mv AT wadedjibril whomulticenterevaluationoffacscountcd4andpimacd4tcellcountsystemsinstrumentperformanceandmisclassificationofhivinfectedpatients
AT daneaugeraldine whomulticenterevaluationoffacscountcd4andpimacd4tcellcountsystemsinstrumentperformanceandmisclassificationofhivinfectedpatients
AT aboudsaid whomulticenterevaluationoffacscountcd4andpimacd4tcellcountsystemsinstrumentperformanceandmisclassificationofhivinfectedpatients
AT vercauterengabyh whomulticenterevaluationoffacscountcd4andpimacd4tcellcountsystemsinstrumentperformanceandmisclassificationofhivinfectedpatients
AT urassawillysk whomulticenterevaluationoffacscountcd4andpimacd4tcellcountsystemsinstrumentperformanceandmisclassificationofhivinfectedpatients
AT kestensluc whomulticenterevaluationoffacscountcd4andpimacd4tcellcountsystemsinstrumentperformanceandmisclassificationofhivinfectedpatients