Head to head comparisons in performance of CD4 point–of-care assays: A Bayesian meta-analysis (2000-2013)

Author:

Wilkinson SamanthaORCID,Chiavegatti TiagoORCID,Nauche BenedicteORCID,Family Name Deactivated Given Names DeactivatedORCID,Pant Pai NitikaORCID

Abstract

Background: Timely detection, staging, treatment initiation are pertinent to controlling HIV Infection. CD4+ cell-based point-of-care (POC) devices offer the potential to rapidly stage patients, and decide on initiating treatment, but a comparative evaluation of their performance has not yet been performed. With this in mind, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analyses. Methods: For the period Jan 2000 to April 2015, 19 databases were systematically searched, 6619 citations retrieved, and 25 articles selected. Diagnostic performance was compared across devices (i.e., PIMA, CyFlow, miniPOC, MBioCD4 System) and across specimens (i.e., capillary blood vs. venous blood). A Bayesian approach was used to meta-analyze the data. The primary outcome, the Bland-Altman (BA) mean bias (which represents agreement between cell counts from POC device and flow cytometry), was analyzed with a Bayesian hierarchical normal model. Findings: We performed a head-to-head comparison of two point-of-care devices, PIMA and PointCareNOW CD4. PIMA appears to perform better vs. PointCareNOW with venous samples (BA mean bias: -9.5 cells/μL; 95% CrI:-37.71 to 18.27 vs. 139.3 cells/μL; 95% CrI:-0.85 to 267.4, mean difference = 148.8, 95% CrI: 11.8, 285.8); however, PIMA’s best performed when used with capillary samples (BA mean bias: 2.2 cells/μL; 95% CrI:-19.32 to 23.6). Sufficient data was available to allow pooling of sensitivity and specificity data only at the 350 cells/μL cutoff. For PIMA device sensitivity 91.6 (84.7 to 95.5) and specificity was 94.8 (90.1 to 97.3) respectively. There was not sufficient data to allow comparisons between any other devices. Conclusions: PIMA device was comparable to flow cytometry. The estimated differences between the CD4+ cell counts of the device and the reference was small and best estimated in capillary blood specimens. As the evidence stands, the PointCareNOW device will need to improve prior to widespread use and more data on MBio and MiniPOC are needed. Findings inform implementation of PIMA and improvements in other CD4 POC device prior to recommending widespread use.

Publisher

ScienceOpen

Reference30 articles.

1. Adult mortality and antiretroviral treatment roll-out in rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa;Herbst A, Cooke G, Bärnighausen T, KanyKany A, Tanser F, Newell M;Bull WHO,2009

2. Mortality reduction associated with HIV/AIDS care and antiretroviral treatment in rural Malawi: evidence from registers, coffin sales and funerals;Mwagomba B, Zachariah R, Massaquoi M, Misindi D, Manzi M, Mandere B, Bemelmans M, Philips M, Kamoto K, Schouten E, Harries A;PLoS ONE,2010

3. Extent to which low-level use of antiretroviral treatment could curb the AIDS epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa;Wood E, Braitstein P, Montaner J, Schechter M, Tyndall M, O'shaughnessy M, Hogg R;Lancet,2000

4. Utility of routine viral load, CD4 cell count, and clinical monitoring among adults with HIV receiving antiretroviral therapy in Uganda: randomised trial;Mermin J, Ekwaru J, Were W, Degerman R, Bunnell R, Kaharuza F, Downing R, Coutinho A, Solberg P, Alexander L;BMJ,2011

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3