TABLE 1.
Direct comparison of physical crossmatch results vs virtual crossmatch results for Exchanges 6 to 17
| T-cell physical XM | B-cell physical XM | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| + | − | Ø | + | − | Ø | ||||
| Virtual T-cell flow XM | + | 89 | 13 | 11 | Virtual B-cell flow XM | + | 117 | 19 | 15 |
| − | 16 | 44 | 5 | − | 15 | 16 | 8 | ||
| Ø | 7 | 7 | 1 | Ø | 2 | 1 | 0 | ||
| 112 | 64 | 17 | 134 | 36 | 23 | ||||
+: positive; −: negative; Ø: borderline/undetermined/not reported. The total sum of true positive (+, +) T-FXM predictions (n = 89) (ie, predictions matching T-FXM outcome) and true positive (+, +) B-FXM predictions (n = 117) are shown. T-cell: POS concordance = 79% (95% CI, 71%-86%); AUC = 0.72 (95% CI, 0.63-0.81). B-cell: POS concordance = 87% (95% CI, 71%-84%); AUC = 0.67 (95% CI, 0.58-0.76).
AUC, area under the curve; CI, confidence interval; FXM, flow cytometry crossmatch; POS, positive; T-FXM, T-cell FXM.