Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 3, 2026

Comprehensive & Cost Effective Laboratory Monitoring of HIV/AIDS: an African Role Model
Published on: October 31, 2010
Analytical performance of the VITA™ point-of-care CD4 enumeration assay
Chui Mei Ong1, Aquiles R Henriquez-Trujillo2, Melissa Alamillo1
1University of California, 1001 Potrero Avenue, San Francisco CA94110, United States; San Francisco General Hospital, 1001 Potrero Avenue, San Francisco CA94110, United States.
None:
CD4+ T-cell enumeration remains critical for management of people with HIV (PWH). In resource-limited settings, point-of-care CD4 testing can increase accessibility and decrease turnaround time compared to flow cytometry. This study evaluated the performance of VITA™ point-of-care CD4 (Accesso Biotech; VITA™ CD4) compared to AQUIOS™ (Beckman Coulter; AQUIOS™) flow cytometry. Remnant venous blood samples from PWH with known CD4 counts on FDA-cleared AQUIOS™ flow cytometry were tested twice with VITA™ CD4. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, Bland-Altman agreement analysis, and Passing-Bablok regression. The coefficient of variation was calculated on duplicate measurements. The University of San Francisco Institutional Review Board approved the study. VITA™ CD4 results showed strong correlation with AQUIOS flow cytometry (r = 0.973, p < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis revealed a mean bias of -48.9 cells/μl (95% CI: -61.8 to -36.0), with limits of agreement from -231.1 to 133.3 cells/μl. For samples <500 CD4 cells/μL (n = 137), the mean bias was reduced to -8.6 cells/μl (95% CI: -17.8 to 0.6). Passing-Bablok regression suggested a small constant positive bias and proportional bias at counts above 500 cells/μl [y = 30.2 (95% CI: 19.3 to 44.2) + 0.83× (95% CI: 0.80-0.86)]. The coefficient of variation for duplicate VITA CD4 measurements was 11.86%. VITA™ CD4 results correlated strongly with flow cytometry at clinically relevant CD4 values. Its diagnostic performance and applicability at point-of-care make it a promising CD4 tool, also in settings with limited laboratory infrastructure. Further clinical validation and assessment of user acceptability is recommended.

