TABLE 4.
Comparison of within-laboratory precision of absolute CD4 and CD8 T-cell counts for predicate method versus Flow-Count and tetraONE methodsa
| T cells | CD4 stratum | Median %CV (P vs predicate method)
|
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predicate method | Flow-Count method | tetraONE method | ||
| CD4 | All | 5.8 | 5.6 (0.421) | 4.8 (0.002) |
| <200 | 8.9 | 7.4 (0.619) | 4.6 (0.002) | |
| >200 | 5.1 | 5.2 (0.617) | 4.9 (0.288) | |
| CD8 | All | 6.0 | 5.4 (0.076) | 5.5 (0.017) |
| <200 | 7.6 | 5.3 (0.066) | 5.8 (0.004) | |
| >200 | 5.4 | 5.5 (0.599) | 5.2 (0.516) | |
a
%CVs were calculated from eight replicates of each specimen at 6 h. Replicate analyses were performed by each method. %CVs in Flow-Count and tetraONE methods were compared with %CV from the predicate method as described in Materials and Methods. A P value of <0.025 was considered significant.