| Literature DB >> 23631664 |
Donato Koyalta1, Mohammad-Ali Jenabian, Ngamasra Nadjiouroum, Barou Djouater, Noël Djemadji-Oudjeil, Angélique Ndjoyi-Mbiguino, Laurent Bélec.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Validation of new affordable CD4 T cell measurement technologies is crucial specifically in resource-poor countries for antiretroviral treatment eligibility and immunologic CD4 monitoring of HIV-infected patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23631664 PMCID: PMC3653683 DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-6-169
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Figure 1Gating strategy for volumetric, CD45-assisted panleucogating Auto40 flow cytometer (Apogee Flow Systems Ltd, Hemel Hempstead, UK), as depicted from typical figure provided by “Auto-Lymphocyte” software (Apogee Flow Systems Ltd) for the counting of CD4 T lymphocytes: A. CD45-PE-Dyomics649 x axis-light scatter dot plot scattergram; the primary CD45 gating differentiates clearly the CD45-positive lymphocytes and monocyte populations, and the population of polymorphonuclear cells; B. CD4-PE x axis-light scatter dot plot scattergram; double secondary CD4 gatings allow counting independently the population of CD4-negative lymphocyte and CD4-positive lymphocytes; C. Representative figure depicted by the software “Auto-Lymphocyte” in one blood sample taken as example: () CD45 (FL2)xside scatter (LS2) dot plot scattergram; () CD4 (FL1)xside scatter (LS2) dot plot scattergram; () Distribution of bright CD45 events during blood sample counting; () Distribution of bright CD4 events within the primary CD45 gating scattergram, during blood sample counting.
CD4 T cell counting in absolute cells/μl and percentage in 182 HIV-1-infected adults and 76 HIV-1-infected children older than 5 years, by the Apogee Auto40 flow cytometer at the hôpital Militaire D’Instruction, N’Djamena, Chad, and by the FACSCalibur at the hôpital de la Liberté, N’Djamena
| | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| | | | |
| Apogee Auto40 | Mean ± SD | 627 ± 591 | 1432 ± 821 |
| FACSCalibur | Mean ± SD | 635 ± 588 | 1449 ± 835 |
| Absolute bias (limits of agreement)a | Mean (±1.96 SD) | −16.0 (−38.2;6.1) | 30.0 (−14.7;88.7) |
| Relative (%) bias (limits of agreement)b | Mean (±1.96 SD) | 1.0 (−1.8;3.8) | 0.3 (−2.2;2.7) |
| | | | |
| Apogee Auto40 | Mean ± SD | 29.1 ± 12.8 | 32.1 ± 10.1 |
| FACSCalibur | Mean ± SD | 28.5 ± 12.5 | 32.3 ± 10.6 |
| Absolute bias (limits of agreement)a | Mean (±1.96 SD) | −3.0 (−7.1;1.1) | 1.0 (−0.4;2.4) |
| Relative (%) bias (limits of agreement)b | Mean (±1.96 SD) | −11.0 (−25.8;3.8) | 3.0 (−1.3;5.3) |
a The Bland Altman analysis was carried out to calculate the absolute bias and limits of agreement which are the 95% confidence intervals (±1.96 × SD) of the mean bias of all paired measurements in a given category [27];
b The Pollock analysis was carried out to calculate the relative bias and limits of agreement which are the 95% confidence intervals (±1.96 × SD) of the mean bias of all paired measurements in a given category [28].
SD: Standard deviation.
CD4 T cell counting in absolute count and percentage in 258 HIV-1-infected individuals, by the Apogee Auto40 flow cytometer at the hôpital Militaire D’Instruction, N’Djamena, Chad, and by the FACSCalibur at the hôpital de la Liberté, N’Djamena, at various CD4 T cell count ranges according to the FACSCalibur results
| | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | |
| Apogee Auto40 | Mean ± SD | 118 ± 161 | 278 ± 129 | 2990 ± 3745 |
| FACSCalibur | Mean ± SD | 100 ± 135 | 215 ± 103 | 3017 ± 3756 |
| Absolute bias (limits of agreement)a | Mean (±1.96 SD) | −4.0 (−33.8;+25.8) | 10.0 (−70.0;+90.0) | 12.0 (−160.7;+184.7) |
| Relative (%) bias (limits of agreement)b | Mean (±1.96 SD) | 62.0 (−134.0;+258.0) | 7.0 (−27.2;+41.2) | −3.0 (−12.4;+6.4) |
| | | | | |
| Apogee Auto40 | Mean ± SD | 10.0 ± 12.7 | 19.5 ± 6.3 | 55.1 ± 44.5 |
| FACSCalibur | Mean ± SD | 9.0 ± 11.3 | 18.0 ± 4.2 | 53.3 ± 41.7 |
| Absolute bias (limits of agreement)a | Mean (±1.96 SD) | 1.0 (−1.8;+3.8) | 2.0 (−2.3;+6.3) | 2.0 (−3.4;+7.4) |
| Relative (%) bias (limits of agreement)b | Mean (±1.96 SD) | 6.0 (−10.3;+22.3) | 7.0 (−13.2;+27.2) | 2.0 (−4.6;+8.6) |
* Results in absolute CD4 T cell counts by Auto40 and FACSCalibur were correlated using the non-parametric Passing–Bablok regression analysis (< 200 cells/μl: r = 0.86, slope = 1.11, intercept = −12.0; 200 – 350 cells/μl: r = 0.68, slope = 1.31, intercept = −96.5; > 350 cells/μl: r = 0.98, slope = 1.02, intercept = −24.8);
** Results in percentage CD4 T cell counts by Auto40 and FACSCalibur were correlated using the non-parametric Passing–Bablok regression analysis (< 200 cells/μl: r = 0.89, slope = 1.00, intercept = 0.0; 200 – 350 cells/μl: r = 0.89, slope = 1.00, intercept = 0.0; > 350 cells/μl: r = 0.95, slope = 1.00, intercept = 0.0);
a The Bland Altman analysis was carried out to calculate the absolute bias and limits of agreement which are the 95% confidence intervals (±1.96 × SD) of the mean bias of all paired measurements in a given category [27];
b The Pollock analysis was carried out to calculate the relative bias and limits of agreement which are the 95% confidence intervals (±1.96 × SD) of the mean bias of all paired measurements in a given category [28].
SD: Standard deviation.
Figure 2Results from CD4 T cell count measurements in 182 HIV-1-infected adults and 76 HIV-1-infected children older than 5 years, expressed in absolute number (cells/μl) and in percentage carried out in parallel by the Auto40 flow cytometer and by the FACSCalibur. A, A’, C and C’. Passing-Bablok agreement tests between the CD4 T cell count results obtained by Auto40 and FACSCalibur flow cytometers, in absolute number (A and A’) and in percentage (C and C’). The diagonal dotted line represents the ideal line (no bias). The full line represents the regression line of the distribution; B, B’, D and D’. Bland-Altman analyses on the relative differences between the CD4 T cell counts obtained by Auto40 and FACSCalibur flow cytometers compared with the average CD4 T cell count, in absolute number (B and B’) and in percentage (D and D’). The full line represents the mean relative difference, and the dotted lines represent the superior and inferior limits of agreement. The arrow corresponds to the x abscise axis.
The sensitivity and specificity of CD4 T cell counting by the Auto40 to identify patients having less than (or more than) 200 CD4 T cells/μl, 350 CD4 T cells/μl, 750 CD4 T cells/μl and 25%CD4+, calculated on the 258 available CD4 T cell count measurements
| | 89% | 99% | 0.97 | |
| 94% | 98% | 0.98 | ||
| | 99% | 96% | 0.97 | |
| 94% | 98% | 0.96 |
* 200 CD4 T cells/μl: Threshold of immune-restoration under antiretroviral treatment and the threshold for therapeutic initiation according to the 2006-revised WHO recommendations [30];
** 350 CD4 T cells/μl: New WHO threshold for antiretroviral treatment initiation in adults and children aged more than 5 years [3];
*** 750 CD4 T cells/μl and 25%CD4+: WHO thresholds for antiretroviral treatment initiation in children aged between 24 and 59 months [2];
$A 10% bilateral range (i.e., counts between 190 and 210 CD4 T cells/μl for the threshold at 200 CD4 T cells/μl; counts between 332 and 367 CD4 T cells/μl for the threshold at 350 CD4 T cells/μl; counts between 712 and 787 CD4 T cells/μl for the threshold at 750 CD4 T cells/μl; and counts 23.7 and 26.2%CD4+ for the threshold at 25%CD4+) were considered similar.