Field evaluation of PIMA point-of-care CD4 testing in Rakai, Uganda

Towards the development of cost-effective point-of-care diagnostic tools for poverty-related infectious diseases in sub-Saharan Africa

In this review, we examine the current landscape of point-of-care testing (POCT) diagnostic tools designed for poverty-related infectious diseases (PRIDs) in sub-Saharan Africa (sSA) while delineating key avenues for future advancements. Our analysis encompasses both established and emerging diagnostic methods for PRIDs, addressing the persistent challenges in POCT tool development and deployment, such as cost, accessibility, and reliability. We emphasize recent advancements in POCT diagnostic tools as well as platforms poised to enhance diagnostic testing in sSA. Recognizing the urgency for affordable and widely accessible POCT diagnostic tools to detect PRIDs in sSA, we advocate for a multidisciplinary approach. This approach integrates current and emerging diagnostic methods, explicitly addressing challenges hindering point-of-care (POC) tool development. Furthermore, it recognizes the profound impact of misdiagnosis on public and global health, emphasizing the need for effective tools. To facilitate the successful development and implementation of POCT diagnostic tools in sSA, we propose strategies including the creation of multi-analyte detection POCT tools, the implementation of education and training programs, community engagement initiatives, fostering public-private collaborations, and the establishment of reliable supply chains. Through these concerted efforts, we aim to accelerate the development of POCT in the sSA region, ensuring its effectiveness and accessibility in addressing the diagnostic challenges associated with PRIDs.

Field Performance of PIMA Point-of-Care Machine for CD4 Enumeration Under a Mobile HIV Counseling and Testing Program in Remote Fishing Communities of Lake Victoria, Uganda

Uganda is among the most HIV/AIDS-afflicted countries, and many HIV-infected persons live in remote areas with poor access to health care. The success of HIV care programs relies in part on patient monitoring using CD4 T cell counts. We conducted an evaluation of the point-of-care PIMA test using BD FACSCount as a gold standard. One hundred fifty-one participants were enrolled, provided venous blood and samples tested at the point of care with the Alere PIMA™ CD4 Analyzer and the BD FACSCount in the UVRI-IAVI main laboratory. Correlation between the methods was assessed, as was the ability of the Pima Analyzer to predict values <200, <350, and ≥500 CD4 cells/mm³ when compared with BD FACSCount as the gold standard. A near-perfect positive Pearson correlation coefficient (r = 0.948; p < .0001) between the two methods was observed. The Alere PIMA Analyzer had a mean bias of -32.5 cells/mm³. The sensitivity and specificity, for PIMA to predict CD4 lymphocyte count less than 200 cells/mm³, were 71.4% and 100%, respectively; less than 350 cells/mm³ were 84.6% and 94.6%, respectively; and at CD4 count less than 500 cells/mm³ were 94.4% and 100%. The Alere Pima Analyzer provides reliable CD4 cell count measurement and is suitable for monitoring and screening eligible HIV patients in hard-to-reach settings.

Diagnosis of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection

HIV diagnostics have played a central role in the remarkable progress in identifying, staging, initiating, and monitoring infected individuals on life-saving antiretroviral therapy. They are also useful in surveillance and outbreak responses, allowing for assessment of disease burden and identification of vulnerable populations and transmission "hot spots," thus enabling planning, appropriate interventions, and allocation of appropriate funding. HIV diagnostics are critical in achieving epidemic control and require a hybrid of conventional laboratory-based diagnostic tests and new technologies, including point-of-care (POC) testing, to expand coverage, increase access, and positively impact patient management. In this review, we provide (i) a historical perspective on the evolution of HIV diagnostics (serologic and molecular) and their interplay with WHO normative guidelines, (ii) a description of the role of conventional and POC testing within the tiered laboratory diagnostic network, (iii) information on the evaluations and selection of appropriate diagnostics, (iv) a description of the quality management systems needed to ensure reliability of testing, and (v) strategies to increase access while reducing the time to return results to patients. Maintaining the central role of HIV diagnostics in programs requires periodic monitoring and optimization with quality assurance in order to inform adjustments or alignment to achieve epidemic control.

Performance evaluation of BD FACSPresto™ point of care CD4 analyzer to enumerate CD4 counts for monitoring HIV infected individuals in Nigeria

Background

Despite the upsurge in support and intervention of donor agencies in HIV care and treatment programing in Sub-Sahara African, antiretroviral (ART) programs are still confronted with access and coverage challenges which influence enrolment of new patients. This study investigated the validity of point of care BD FACSPresto^™ CD4 analyzer for CD4+ cell count, overall agreement, correlation, sensitivity, and specificity in comparison to a reference standard flow cytometry method. We also assessed the feasibility of use among non-laboratorians.

Methods

Blood samples from 300 HIV infected individuals were analyzed for CD4+ T cell and CD4%, using finger prick capillary sample from 150 PMTCT clients and 150 ART clients at Murtala Mohammed Specialist Hospital, Kano, Nigeria. Their venous samples were compared on a flow cytometry reference method using BD FACSCount CD4+ count system. The accuracy of the BD FACSPresto machine in comparison to BD FACSCount was evaluated. Statistical analysis was carried out using STATA (version 12). Bland-Altman method and correlation analysis were used to analyze agreement between both measurements. In addition, sensitivity and specificity of both measurements were determined. Statistical significance was set at p-value <0.05.

Results

The mean bias and limit of agreement for CD4+ count between BD FACSPresto and BD FACS count machine were 7.49 (95% CI: 2.44 to 12.54) and -8.14 to 96.39 respectively. Further analysis revealed close agreement between BD FACSPresto and BD FACSCount with no significant difference between the two methods (p = .0.95). Using a threshold of 500 cells/μL, sensitivity and specificity of BD FACSPresto were 95.1% and 97.1% respectively, compared to BD FACSCount. There was no statistically significant difference in the misclassification between BD FACSPresto and BD FACSCount results (p = 0.23). Furthermore, sensitivity and specificity were similar when BD FACSPresto machine was operated by a nurse or laboratory scientist, there was no substantial difference in testing variability observed between laboratory and non-laboratory operators using the BD FACSPresto analyzer.

Conclusions

Overall, BD FACSPresto Point of Care CD4+ count finger stick capillary blood results is a reliable method in comparison to venous sample cytometry method and no significant difference variability observed between laboratory personnel and non-laboratory operators. The BD FACSPresto is simple, more robust and easy to use equipment without significant variability in reliability by non-laboratory health care workers hence will be a valuable instrument in increasing access and coverage of CD4 estimations in developing countries. The introduction of the BD FACSPresto POC analyzer has a high potential in reducing patients waiting time and improving the overall quality of ART service and clients’ satisfaction especially in rural settings.

Performance of FACSPresto Point-of-Care Instrument for CD4-T Cell Enumeration in Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)-Infected Patients Attending Care and Treatment Clinics in Belgium and Tanzania

BACKGROUND

CD4 T-cell counts are widely used to assess treatment eligibility and to follow-up HIV-infected patients. The World Health Organization prequalification of in vitro diagnostics program conducted a performance evaluation of the FACSPresto (BD Biosciences), a new point-of-care instrument to measure absolute CD4-T cell (CD4) counts and percentages in venous and capillary blood samples from HIV-infected patients.

METHODS

Patients were recruited in Belgium (200 patients) and in Tanzania (247 patients). Venous blood samples were analyzed in two nearby reference laboratories. In addition, nurses/technicians collected a capillary blood sample by finger prick directly into a FACSPresto CD4 cartridge. Assay precision was assessed on fresh blood and on external quality control samples. Trueness (bias) was assessed by comparing results from FACSPresto with the reference (single-platform FACSCalibur). Clinical misclassification was measured at 200, 350 and 500 cells/μL thresholds.

RESULTS

Intra-assay precision was < 6%, and inter-assay < 8%. CD4 results from FACSPresto and reference method resulted in regression slopes of 0.99-1.11 using either venous or capillary blood. Correlation was better for venous than for capillary blood (minimum 0.97 vs 0.93 respectively). Capillary blood resulted in a larger bias than venous blood, with 24 and 83 cells/μL for absolute CD4 counts on capillary blood in Antwerp and Dar es Salaam respectively, vs 12 and 41 cells/μL on venous blood. Bias on CD4% was < 1% on both venous and capillary blood, and was proportionally better than for absolute CD4 counts. Clinical misclassification was in line with the average overestimation, showing a very good specificity, but sensitivity around 70-90%. The rejection rate was 11% on first reading, leading to 6% of all samples without final result after a second reading.

CONCLUSIONS

The FACSPresto performed very well on venous blood samples, and well on capillary blood samples.

Performance of point-of-care CD4 testing technologies in resource-constrained settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Point-of-care (POC) CD4 testing increases patient accessibility to assessment of antiretroviral therapy eligibility. This review evaluates field performance in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) of currently available POC CD4 technologies.

Methods

Eight electronic databases were searched for field studies published between January 2005 and January 2015 of six POC CD4 platforms: PointCare NOW™, Alere Pima™ CD4, Daktari™ CD4 Counter, CyFlow® CD4 miniPOC, BD FACSPresto™, and MyT4™ CD4. Due to limited data availability, meta-analysis was conducted only for diagnostic performance of Pima at a threshold of 350 cells/μl, applying a bivariate multi-level random-effects modelling approach. A covariate extended model was also explored to test for difference in diagnostic performance between capillary and venous blood.

Results

Twenty seven studies were included. Published field study results were found for three of the six POC CD4 tests, 24 of which used Pima. For Pima, test failure rates varied from 2 to 23 % across study settings. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.92 (95 % CI = 0.88–0.95) and 0.87 (95 % CI = 0.85–0.88) respectively. Diagnostic performance by blood sample type (venous vs. capillary) revealed non-significant differences in sensitivity (0.94 vs 0.89) and specificity (0.86 vs 0.87), respectively in the extended model (Wald χ²(2) = 4.77, p = 0.09).

Conclusions

POC CD4 testing can provides reliable results for making treatment decision under field conditions in low-resource settings. The Pima test shows a good diagnostic performance at CD4 cut-off of 350 cells/μl. More data are required to evaluate performance of POC CD4 testing using venous versus capillary blood in LMICs which might otherwise influence clinical practice.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12879-016-1931-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Acceptability and feasibility of point-of-care CD4 testing on HIV continuum of care in low and middle income countries: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

CD4 testing is, and will remain an important part of HIV treatment and care in low and middle income countries (LMICs). We report the findings of a systematic review assessing acceptability and feasibility of POC CD4 testing in field settings.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for studies published in English between 2005 and 2015 that describe POC CD4 platforms. Studies conducted in LMICs and under field conditions outside a laboratory environment were eligible. Qualitative and descriptive data analysis was used to present the findings.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included, 11 of which were conducted in sub-Saharan countries and used one POC CD4 test (The Alere Pima CD4). Patients reported positively regarding the implementation of POC CD4 testing at primary health care and community level with ≥90 % of patients accepting the test across various study settings. Health service providers expressed preference toward POC CD4 testing as it is easy-to-use, efficient and satisfied patients' needs to a greater extent as compared to conventional methods. However, operational challenges including preference toward venous blood rather than finger-prick sampling, frequent device failures and operator errors, quality of training for test operators and supervisors, and increased staff workload were also identified.

CONCLUSIONS

POC CD4 testing seems acceptable and feasible in LIMCs under field conditions. Further studies using different POC CD4 tests available on the market are required to provide critical data to support countries in selection and implementation of appropriate POC CD4 technologies.

PIMA™ point-of-care testing for CD4 counts in predicting antiretroviral initiation in HIV-infected individuals in KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa

Introduction

Limited information is available on the usefulness of the PIMA™ analyser in predicting antiretroviral treatment eligibility and outcome in a primary healthcare clinic setting in disadvantaged communities in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Materials and methods

The study was conducted under the eThekwini Health Unit, Durban, KwaZulu-Natal. Comparison of the enumeration of CD4+ T-cells in 268 patients using the PIMA™ analyser and the predicate National Health Laboratory Services (NHLS) was undertaken during January to July 2013. Bland-Altman analysis to calculate bias and limits of agreement, precision and levels of clinical misclassification at various CD4+ T-cell count thresholds was performed.

Results

There was high precision of the PIMA™ control bead cartridges with low and normal CD4+ T-cell counts using three different PIMA™ analysers (%CV < 5). Under World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines (≤ 500 cells/mm³), the sensitivity of the PIMA™ analyser was 94%, specificity 78% and positive predictive value (PPV) 95%. There were 24 (9%) misclassifications, of which 13 were false-negative in whom the mean bias was 149 CD4+ T-cells/mm³. Most (87%) patients returned for their CD4 test result but only 67% (110/164) of those eligible (≤ 350 cells/mm³) were initiated on antiretroviral therapy (ART) with a time to treatment of 49 days (interquartile range [IQR], 42–64 days).

Conclusion

There was adequate agreement between PIMA™ analyser and predicate NHLS CD4+ T-cell count enumeration (≤ 500 cells/mm³) in adult HIV-positive individuals. The high PPV, sensitivity and acceptable specificity of the PIMA™ analyser technology lend it as a reliable tool in predicting eligibility and rapid linkage to care in ART programmes.

Performance Evaluation of the Becton Dickinson FACSPresto™ Near-Patient CD4 Instrument in a Laboratory and Typical Field Clinic Setting in South Africa

Background

The BD-FACSPresto^™ CD4 is a new, point-of-care (POC) instrument utilising finger-stick capillary blood sampling. This study evaluated its performance against predicate CD4 testing in South Africa.

Methods

Phase-I testing: HIV+ patient samples (n = 214) were analysed on the Presto^™ under ideal laboratory conditions using venous blood. During Phase-II, 135 patients were capillary-bled for CD4 testing on FACSPresto^™, performed according to manufacturer instruction. Comparative statistical analyses against predicate PLG/CD4 method and industry standards were done using GraphPad Prism 6. It included Bland-Altman with 95% limits of agreement (LOA) and percentage similarity with coefficient of variation (%CV) analyses for absolute CD4 count (cells/μl) and CD4 percentage of lymphocytes (CD4%).

Results

In Phase-I, 179/217 samples yielded reportable results with Presto^™ using venous blood filled cartridges. Compared to predicate, a mean bias of 40.4±45.8 (LOA of -49.2 to 130.2) and %similarity (%CV) of 106.1%±7.75 (7.3%) was noted for CD4 absolute counts. In Phase-2 field study, 118/135 capillary-bled Presto^™ samples resulted CD4 parameters. Compared to predicate, a mean bias of 50.2±92.8 (LOA of -131.7 to 232) with %similarity (%CV) 105%±10.8 (10.3%), and 2.87±2.7 (LOA of -8.2 to 2.5) with similarity of 94.7±6.5% (6.83%) noted for absolute CD4 and CD4% respectively. No significant clinical differences were indicated for either parameter using two sampling methods.

Conclusion

The Presto^™ produced remarkable precision to predicate methods, irrespective of venous or capillary blood sampling. A consistent, clinically insignificant over-estimation (5–7%) of counts against PLG/CD4 and equivalency to FACSCount^™ was noted. Further field studies are awaited to confirm longer-term use.

CD4 results with a bias larger than hundred cells per microliter can have a significant impact on the clinical decision during treatment initiation of HIV patients

BACKGROUND

CD4 counts are currently used to assess HIV patients for treatment eligibility and to monitor antiretroviral response to treatment. The emerging point-of-care devices could fill an important gap in resource-limited settings. However, the accuracy of CD4-counting instruments is diverse and data on how CD4 measurement errors have an impact on clinical decisions are lacking.

METHODS

Clinicians were queried on the use of CD4 results in their clinical setting. Subsequently, the effect of CD4 measurement errors on treatment initiation was put in a statistical model. Based on clinical CD4 databases from Belgium, Cambodia, and Senegal, the percentage of unchanged clinical decisions was calculated (treatment initiation should start within a 3-month delay [one visit]) for escalating CD4 measurement errors, taking into account the strict or preventive application of CD4 thresholds at 350 or 500 cells/µl used by clinicians.

RESULTS

To ensure that the treatment was initiated appropriately for at least 95% of patients, an error of 5 - 10 cells/µl was allowed. This is significantly smaller than the bias of ±50 cells/µl most clinicians considered acceptable. For limits of agreement (LOA, 1.96 x error) of 100 cells/µl, corresponding to most CD4 instrument evaluations, the misclassification rate of patients was found to be 3 - 28% at the threshold of 350 cells/µl (strict or flexible), and 13 - 20% at 500 cells/µl.

CONCLUSIONS

The maximum allowed CD4 bias on results from new CD4 technologies should not exceed 50 cells/µl (LOA 100 cells/µl) when applied for treatment initiation, to ensure at least 72% of correct clinical decisions. © 2016 International Clinical Cytometry Society.

Using BD Vacutainer CD4 Stabilization Tubes for Absolute Cluster of Differentiation Type 4 Cell Count Measurement on BD FacsCount and Partec Cyflow Cytometers: A Method Comparison Study from Zimbabwe

Background

Blood collected in conventional EDTA tubes requires laboratory analysis within 48 hours to provide valid CD4 cell count results. This restricts access to HIV care for patients from rural areas in resource-constraint settings due to sample transportation problems. Stabilization Tubes with extended storage duration have been developed but not yet evaluated comprehensively.

Objective

To investigate stability of absolute CD4 cell count measurement of samples in BD Vacutainer CD4 Stabilization Tubes over the course of 30 days.

Methods

This was a laboratory-based method comparison study conducted at a rural district hospital in Beitbridge, Zimbabwe. Whole peripheral blood from 88 HIV positive adults was drawn into BD Vacutainer CD4 Stabilization Tubes and re-tested 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 14 and 30 days after collection on BD FacsCount and Partec Cyflow cytometers in parallel. Absolute CD4 cell levels were compared to results from paired samples in EDTA tubes analysed on BD FacsCount at the day of sample collection (references methodology). Bland-Altman analysis based on ratios of the median CD4 counts was used, with acceptable variation ranges for Limits of Agreements of +/-20%.

Results

Differences in ratios of the medians remained below 10% until day 21 on BD FacsCount and until day 5 on Partec Cyflow. Variations of Limits of Agreement were beyond 20% after day 1 on both cytometers. Specimen quality decreased steadily after day 5, with only 68% and 40% of samples yielding results on BD FacsCount and Partec Cyflow at day 21, respectively.

Conclusions

We do not recommend the use of BD Vacutainer CD4 Stabilization Tubes for absolute CD4 cell count measurement on BD FacsCount or Partec Cyflow due to large variation of results and decay of specimen quality. Alternative technologies for enhanced CD4 testing in settings with limited laboratory and sample transportation capacity still need to be developed.

Errors generated by a point-of-care CD4+ T-lymphocyte analyser: a retrospective observational study in nine countries

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the proportion of invalid results generated by a CD4+ T-lymphocyte analyser used by Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in field projects and identify factors associated with invalid results.

METHODS

We collated 25,616 CD4+ T-lymphocyte test results from 39 sites in nine countries for the years 2011 to 2013. Information about the setting, user, training, sampling technique and device repair history were obtained by questionnaire. The analyser performs a series of checks to ensure that all steps of the analysis are completed successfully; if not, an invalid result is reported. We calculated the proportion of invalid results by device and by operator. Regression analyses were used to investigate factors associated with invalid results.

FINDINGS

There were 3354 invalid test results (13.1%) across 39 sites, for 58 Alere PimaTM devices and 180 operators. The median proportion of errors per device and operator was 12.7% (interquartile range, IQR: 10.3-19.9) and 12.1% (IQR: 7.1-19.2), respectively. The proportion of invalid results varied widely by country, setting, user and device. Errors were not associated with settings, user experience or the number of users per device. Tests performed on capillary blood samples were significantly less likely to generate errors compared to venous whole blood.

CONCLUSION

The Alere Pima CD4+ analyser generated a high proportion of invalid test results, across different countries, settings and users. Most error codes could be attributed to the operator, but the exact causes proved difficult to identify. Invalid results need to be factored into the implementation and operational costs of routine CD4+ T-lymphocyte testing.

Access to CD4 Testing for Rural HIV Patients: Findings from a Cohort Study in Zimbabwe

Background

CD4 cell count measurement remains an important diagnostic tool for HIV care in developing countries. Insufficient laboratory capacity in rural Sub-Saharan Africa is frequently mentioned but data on the impact at an individual patient level are lacking. Urban-rural discrepancies in CD4 testing have not been quantified to date. Such evidence is crucial for public health planning and to justify new yet more expensive diagnostic procedures that could circumvent access constraints in rural areas.

Objective

To compare CD4 testing among rural and urban HIV patients during the first year of treatment.

Methods

Records from 2,145 HIV positive adult patients from a Médecins sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders) HIV project in Beitbridge, Zimbabwe, during 2011 and 2012 were used for a retrospective cohort analysis. Covariate-adjusted risk ratios were calculated to estimate the effects of area of residence on CD4 testing at treatment initiation, six and 12 months among rural and urban patients.

Findings

While the proportion of HIV patients returning for medical consultations at six and 12 months decreased at a similar rate in both patient groups, CD4 testing during consultations dropped to 21% and 8% for urban, and 2% and 1% for rural patients at six and 12 months, respectively. Risk ratios for missing CD4 testing were 0.8 (95% CI 0.7-0.9), 9.2 (95% CI 5.5-15.3), and 7.6 (95% 3.7-17.1) comparing rural versus urban patients at treatment initiation, six and 12 months, respectively.

Conclusions

CD4 testing was low overall, and particularly poor in rural patients. Difficulties with specimen transportation were probably a major factor underlying this difference and requires new diagnostic approaches. Our findings point to severe health system constraints in providing CD4 testing overall that need to be addressed if effective monitoring of HIV patients is to be achieved, whether by alternative CD4 diagnostics or newly-recommended routine viral load testing.

Field Evaluation of a Point-of-Care CD4 Analyzer for Monitoring HIV Patients in the Interior of the Amazon Region, Brazil

Objective

To evaluate the accuracy of the PIMA point-of-care CD4 analyzer (PIMA) under field conditions in comparison to the current CD4 count system (FACSCalibur), and to evaluate the operational suitability and acceptability of health professionals (HP) and HIV-patients in using the PIMA in health clinics in the Amazon Region.

Methods

CD4 counts were measured onsite by the PIMA using fingerprick blood and in the reference laboratory by both the PIMA and FACSCalibur using venous blood. We used the Bland–Altman method to estimate the mean bias, and calculated the sensitivity and specificity at <200 and <500 cell/μL thresholds. Patients (n = 404) and HP (n = 7) were interviewed on the acceptability and operational suitability of the PIMA.

Results

Using fingerprick blood (n = 337), the PIMA showed a concordance correlation coefficient (Rc) of 0.81, mean difference of -111.9 cell/μL, 93.1%/98.5% sensitivity, and 89.2%/56.7% specificity at <200 and <500 cell/μL thresholds, respectively. Venous blood (n = 340) showed an Rc of 0.89, mean difference of -83.4 cell/μL, 98.3%/97.5% sensitivity, and 93.9%/66.0% specificity at <200 and <500 cell/μL thresholds, respectively. The capillary PIMA was well accepted and found operationally appropriate by patients and HP.

Conclusions

The agreement between both instruments was poor and the PIMA underestimated CD4 cell counts, which was more pronounced at CD4 counts ≥500 cell/μl. The PIMA’s performance with fingerprick blood was less reliable than its performance with venous blood. In Brazil, where antiretroviral treatment is initiated regardless of CD4 counts, the PIMA’s systematic bias towards CD4 underestimation may limit its role for monitoring HIV-patients.

Point-of-care diagnostics, a major opportunity for change in traditional diagnostic approaches: potential and limitations

'Point-of-care' (POC) diagnostics are a powerful emerging healthcare approach. They can rapidly provide statistically significant results, are simple to use, do not require specialized equipment and are cost-effective. For these reasons, they have the potential to play a major role in revolutionizing the diagnosis, initiation and monitoring of treatment of major global diseases. This review focuses on antibody-based POC devices that target four major global diseases: cardiovascular diseases, prostate cancer, HIV infection and tuberculosis. The key statistics and pathology of each disease is described in detail, followed by an in-depth discussion on emerging POC devices that target each disease, highlighting their potential and limitations.