Important note: Information in this article was accurate in 1998. The state of the art may have changed since the publication date.
CD4 cell counts of 200 x 10(6)/1 or below in natural history studies and surveillance: is one enough or are two better?
Commun Dis Rep CDR Rev. 1997 Nov 14;7(12):R179-85. Unique Identifier : AIDSLINE MED/98055855 Easterbrook PJ; Yu LM; McLean K; Hawkins D; Gazzard B; HIV Epidemiology Unit, Department of HIV/Genitourinary Medicine,; Charing Cross Hospital.
Abstract:
A retrospective cohort study was performed to examine the extent and clinical significance of misclassification associated with using the current United States AIDS case defining category of an initial CD4 count < or = 200 cells x 10(6)/l (< or = 200) compared with a definition requiring two consecutive counts below this level. The main outcomes examined were the probability of subsequent CD4 counts > 200 x 10(6)/l (> 200) and progression times to AIDS and death. Of the 2025 predominantly male homosexual HIV-positive patients attending two hospital based HIV clinics with initial CD4 cell counts < or = 200, 1524 (75%) subsequently had consecutive counts < or = 200, but only half did so at the next CD4 count. Ten per cent had either no further or only non-consecutive counts < or = 200, and 15% had only one CD4 count available for analysis. The cumulative proportion of patients with a CD4 count > 200 at one year after a first count of < or = 200 was about twice (39%) that observed among the subgroup with at least two consecutive counts < or = 200 (19%). The times from the initial counts of < or = 200 to AIDS and death were also shorter by six months and two months, respectively, in the subgroup with two or more consecutive counts < or = 200. A significant proportion of patients will be prematurely classified as having a CD4 cell count < or = 200 if a single CD4 count below this level is accepted. A definition of two consecutive counts < or = 200 should be adopted in preference to a single count < or = 200 for natural history studies and clinical trials, in which precise estimates of the time to or from a defined CD4 threshold are important. In surveillance programmes, however, such an approach may be impractical because of missing or infrequent serial CD4 counts, although adjustments can be made based on these estimates of premature misclassification.
Keywords: *Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/MORTALITY *CD4 Lymphocyte Count *HIV Seropositivity/CLASSIFICATION *HIV Seropositivity/IMMUNOLOGY *Population Surveillance/METHODS 980330
M9831222
AEGiS presents published material, reprinted with permission and neither endorses nor opposes any material. All information contained on this website, including information relating to health conditions, products, and treatments, is for informational purposes only. It is often presented in summary or aggregate form. It is not meant to be a substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical professionals. Always discuss treatment options with a doctor who specializes in treating HIV.
Important note: Information in this article was accurate in 1998. The state of the art may have changed since the publication date.
