Cargando…

CD4 Enumeration Technologies: A Systematic Review of Test Performance for Determining Eligibility for Antiretroviral Therapy

BACKGROUND: Measurement of CD4(+) T-lymphocytes (CD4) is a crucial parameter in the management of HIV patients, particularly in determining eligibility to initiate antiretroviral treatment (ART). A number of technologies exist for CD4 enumeration, with considerable variation in cost, complexity, and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Peeling, Rosanna W., Sollis, Kimberly A., Glover, Sarah, Crowe, Suzanne M., Landay, Alan L., Cheng, Ben, Barnett, David, Denny, Thomas N., Spira, Thomas J., Stevens, Wendy S., Crowley, Siobhan, Essajee, Shaffiq, Vitoria, Marco, Ford, Nathan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4366094/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25790185
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115019
_version_ 1782362314722246656
author Peeling, Rosanna W.
Sollis, Kimberly A.
Glover, Sarah
Crowe, Suzanne M.
Landay, Alan L.
Cheng, Ben
Barnett, David
Denny, Thomas N.
Spira, Thomas J.
Stevens, Wendy S.
Crowley, Siobhan
Essajee, Shaffiq
Vitoria, Marco
Ford, Nathan
author_facet Peeling, Rosanna W.
Sollis, Kimberly A.
Glover, Sarah
Crowe, Suzanne M.
Landay, Alan L.
Cheng, Ben
Barnett, David
Denny, Thomas N.
Spira, Thomas J.
Stevens, Wendy S.
Crowley, Siobhan
Essajee, Shaffiq
Vitoria, Marco
Ford, Nathan
author_sort Peeling, Rosanna W.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Measurement of CD4(+) T-lymphocytes (CD4) is a crucial parameter in the management of HIV patients, particularly in determining eligibility to initiate antiretroviral treatment (ART). A number of technologies exist for CD4 enumeration, with considerable variation in cost, complexity, and operational requirements. We conducted a systematic review of the performance of technologies for CD4 enumeration. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Studies were identified by searching electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE using a pre-defined search strategy. Data on test accuracy and precision included bias and limits of agreement with a reference standard, and misclassification probabilities around CD4 thresholds of 200 and 350 cells/μl over a clinically relevant range. The secondary outcome measure was test imprecision, expressed as % coefficient of variation. Thirty-two studies evaluating 15 CD4 technologies were included, of which less than half presented data on bias and misclassification compared to the same reference technology. At CD4 counts <350 cells/μl, bias ranged from -35.2 to +13.1 cells/μl while at counts >350 cells/μl, bias ranged from -70.7 to +47 cells/μl, compared to the BD FACSCount as a reference technology. Misclassification around the threshold of 350 cells/μl ranged from 1-29% for upward classification, resulting in under-treatment, and 7-68% for downward classification resulting in overtreatment. Less than half of these studies reported within laboratory precision or reproducibility of the CD4 values obtained. CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of bias and percent misclassification around treatment thresholds were reported on the CD4 enumeration technologies included in this review, with few studies reporting assay precision. The lack of standardised methodology on test evaluation, including the use of different reference standards, is a barrier to assessing relative assay performance and could hinder the introduction of new point-of-care assays in countries where they are most needed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4366094
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43660942015-03-23 CD4 Enumeration Technologies: A Systematic Review of Test Performance for Determining Eligibility for Antiretroviral Therapy Peeling, Rosanna W. Sollis, Kimberly A. Glover, Sarah Crowe, Suzanne M. Landay, Alan L. Cheng, Ben Barnett, David Denny, Thomas N. Spira, Thomas J. Stevens, Wendy S. Crowley, Siobhan Essajee, Shaffiq Vitoria, Marco Ford, Nathan PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Measurement of CD4(+) T-lymphocytes (CD4) is a crucial parameter in the management of HIV patients, particularly in determining eligibility to initiate antiretroviral treatment (ART). A number of technologies exist for CD4 enumeration, with considerable variation in cost, complexity, and operational requirements. We conducted a systematic review of the performance of technologies for CD4 enumeration. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Studies were identified by searching electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE using a pre-defined search strategy. Data on test accuracy and precision included bias and limits of agreement with a reference standard, and misclassification probabilities around CD4 thresholds of 200 and 350 cells/μl over a clinically relevant range. The secondary outcome measure was test imprecision, expressed as % coefficient of variation. Thirty-two studies evaluating 15 CD4 technologies were included, of which less than half presented data on bias and misclassification compared to the same reference technology. At CD4 counts <350 cells/μl, bias ranged from -35.2 to +13.1 cells/μl while at counts >350 cells/μl, bias ranged from -70.7 to +47 cells/μl, compared to the BD FACSCount as a reference technology. Misclassification around the threshold of 350 cells/μl ranged from 1-29% for upward classification, resulting in under-treatment, and 7-68% for downward classification resulting in overtreatment. Less than half of these studies reported within laboratory precision or reproducibility of the CD4 values obtained. CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of bias and percent misclassification around treatment thresholds were reported on the CD4 enumeration technologies included in this review, with few studies reporting assay precision. The lack of standardised methodology on test evaluation, including the use of different reference standards, is a barrier to assessing relative assay performance and could hinder the introduction of new point-of-care assays in countries where they are most needed. Public Library of Science 2015-03-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4366094/ /pubmed/25790185 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115019 Text en https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Public Domain declaration, which stipulates that, once placed in the public domain, this work may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose.
spellingShingle Research Article
Peeling, Rosanna W.
Sollis, Kimberly A.
Glover, Sarah
Crowe, Suzanne M.
Landay, Alan L.
Cheng, Ben
Barnett, David
Denny, Thomas N.
Spira, Thomas J.
Stevens, Wendy S.
Crowley, Siobhan
Essajee, Shaffiq
Vitoria, Marco
Ford, Nathan
CD4 Enumeration Technologies: A Systematic Review of Test Performance for Determining Eligibility for Antiretroviral Therapy
title CD4 Enumeration Technologies: A Systematic Review of Test Performance for Determining Eligibility for Antiretroviral Therapy
title_full CD4 Enumeration Technologies: A Systematic Review of Test Performance for Determining Eligibility for Antiretroviral Therapy
title_fullStr CD4 Enumeration Technologies: A Systematic Review of Test Performance for Determining Eligibility for Antiretroviral Therapy
title_full_unstemmed CD4 Enumeration Technologies: A Systematic Review of Test Performance for Determining Eligibility for Antiretroviral Therapy
title_short CD4 Enumeration Technologies: A Systematic Review of Test Performance for Determining Eligibility for Antiretroviral Therapy
title_sort cd4 enumeration technologies: a systematic review of test performance for determining eligibility for antiretroviral therapy
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4366094/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25790185
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115019
work_keys_str_mv AT peelingrosannaw cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT solliskimberlya cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT gloversarah cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT crowesuzannem cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT landayalanl cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT chengben cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT barnettdavid cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT dennythomasn cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT spirathomasj cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT stevenswendys cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT crowleysiobhan cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT essajeeshaffiq cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT vitoriamarco cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy
AT fordnathan cd4enumerationtechnologiesasystematicreviewoftestperformancefordeterminingeligibilityforantiretroviraltherapy