Although the depletion of CD4 T cells remains the most reliable marker for estimating the degree of immunosuppression in HIV-1-infected individuals, several authors have investigated the possible prognostic and predictive role offered by total lymphocyte count (TLC) as a surrogate of the CD4 cell count in resource-limited settings (RLS). TLC offers the advantages of being less expensive and less complicated than the CD4 cell count. In addition, the equipment needed is already available in most RLS. Despite these potential advantages, papers recently published on this issue do not demonstrate that TLC fulfils the rigorous requirements as to sensitivity and specificity, particularly needed when methods already proved to be accurate detectors of immunosuppression (such as CD4 cell count) are available [1–6]. The rapid tests for diagnosing HIV infection in adolescents and adults are an example of this, having replaced enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and Western blot in RLS, not only because of their lower cost, but also because of their good mean sensitivity and specificity (98.5 and 93.4%, respectively). The aim of this study was to assess the impact of considering TLC alone on the introduction of antiretroviral therapy in an asymptomatic HIV-infected African population undergoing regular CD4 lymphocyte controls in the framework of a highly active antiretroviral therapy protocol. Moreover, the effectiveness of TLC as a marker of immunosuppression was compared with that of another marker, the body mass index (BMI), requiring the simple measurement of the anthropometrical parameters of weight and height. The study was carried out from March 2002 to May 2003 by analysing 651 paired TLC and CD4 lymphocyte counts collected from asymptomatic patients (1–2 World Health Organization clinical staging) followed in a day hospital for individuals with HIV infection managed by the Community of Sant'Egidio in cooperation with the Ministry of Health of Mozambique. The day hospital, located in Matola-Maputo, Mozambique, is part of the DREAM programme (Drug Resource Enhancement against AIDS and Malnutrition) [7]. TLC was measured by an Act-5 Diff Beckman automated blood-analyser; lymphocyte-phenotyping was performed by ‘lyse-non-wash’ flow-cytometry (EPICS-MCL XL, Beckman Coulter, Johannesburg, South Africa). In 468 cases, BMI was also available, calculated on the same day the patients’ blood was collected. The mean value of TLC was 1935 cells/mm3 (range 200–13 800; SD ± 1035); average BMI was 22.04 (range 11.02–40.06; SD ± 4.17). CD4 lymphocytes were less than 200 cells/mm3 in 277 cases (42.4%). The two-tail Pearson correlation between the CD4 cell count and the other two variables gave a value of r = 0.341 and r = 0.314 for BMI and TLC, respectively (P < 0.001 in both cases) (Table 1).Table 1: CD4 cell count, total lymphocyte count and body mass index: values and statistical correlations.A further analysis was performed by binary logistic regression, to resolve the heterogeneity between dependent and independent variables (although dichotomization of the variables is always required). CD4 cell counts (dependent variable) were divided into two groups, above or below 200 cells/mm3 (the threshold under which patients should receive antiretroviral treatment). The threshold value for the dichotomization of TLC was 1200 cells/mm3, considered a marker of serious immunosuppression according to World Health Organization guidelines for RLS. For BMI, 18 was chosen as the threshold value that indicates malnutrition. The two independent variables were separately compared with dependent variables in order to evaluate their predictive effectiveness. The classification capability of the two models was 65.2% for BMI and 67.6% for TLC; sensitivity was 47 and 48.9%, respectively, whereas specificity was 78.5% for BMI and 81.3% for TLC (Table 1). Consequently, using TLC as a marker for introducing therapy would have resulted in initiating antiretroviral treatment for approximately 20% of patients who could wait according to international guidelines. At the same time, TLC would have excluded from treatment approximately 50% of those having an indication for starting therapy. Interestingly, using BMI instead of TLC would have led to similar results. In confirmation of the results of binary logistic regression, the use of receiving operating characteristics curves for the two variables considered demonstrated that neither TLC nor BMI had the ability to provide accurate discrimination (29% for TLC and 32% for BMI). In conclusion, the use of TLC as a surrogate for the CD4 cell count appears to be unjustified, as it does not fulfil the minimal requirements of validity, whereas it appears to provide a level of information comparable with a simple evaluation of the anthropometric status (such as BMI), which is also indicative of the patients’ clinical condition. The low sensitivity of TLC delays therapeutic decisions, and may lead to disease progression and death in some immunosuppressed patients who could have taken advantage of therapy. Moreover, starting treatment in a significant percentage of patients, in the absence of serious immunosuppression, would overcome the economic advantage obtained by substituting TLC for CD4 cell count.
Read full abstract