Introduction
For decades, the measurement of CD4 cell count has been a cornerstone in understanding the progression of HIV infection and in Aids Diagnosis Cd4 Count criteria. Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) is a severe infection that specifically attacks and destroys CD4 T lymphocytes, critical components of the human immune system. These CD4 T cells, originating in the bone marrow and maturing in the thymus, are vital for immune function, circulating throughout the body to combat infections from bacteria, viruses, and other pathogens. Untreated HIV infects and replicates within these cells, leading to their eventual death and a cascade of infection as newly produced virions infect further cells. This relentless destruction of CD4 T lymphocytes weakens the immune system, making the body vulnerable to opportunistic infections and other complications.1,2
The CD4 cell count is a crucial laboratory test quantifying these CD4 T cells in a blood sample. A normal CD4 count ranges from 500 to 1500 cells per cubic millimeter (cells/mm3). Clinically, this test is used to monitor the extent of CD4 cell depletion in HIV-infected individuals and to assess the effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy (ART). Today, the CD4 cell count remains a primary indicator of HIV disease progression, essential for staging the disease and guiding clinical management.3,4 Notably, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) defines a critical threshold for aids diagnosis cd4 count: a count below 200 cells/mm3 is a key indicator for diagnosing Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS). This significant drop in CD4 T cells markedly increases the risk of opportunistic infections and is associated with higher mortality rates.5
Specimen Collection and Handling for CD4 Count Testing
Accurate CD4+ count measurements rely heavily on the proper collection and handling of blood specimens. This ensures the reliability of test results and their clinical utility in aids diagnosis cd4 count assessment. Blood samples are typically obtained via standard venipuncture, usually from a vein in the arm, and collected into lavender-top tubes containing Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). EDTA acts as an anticoagulant, preventing blood from clotting and preserving the integrity of blood cells for analysis.6
Meticulous labeling of the blood collection tube is paramount to avoid errors and ensure proper patient identification. Essential labeling information includes the patient’s full identification details, the date and time of collection, the patient’s age and gender, and the initials or name of the person collecting the sample. Standardized labeling formats can further enhance clarity and minimize potential confusion in sample management. Immediately after blood collection, the tube should be gently inverted 6 to 8 times. This mixing is crucial for ensuring the EDTA anticoagulant is thoroughly mixed with the blood, preventing clot formation that could compromise the accuracy of the CD4 count test.7
Transportation and handling of the blood sample must adhere to established guidelines, particularly those outlined by the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act and the International Air Transport Association (IATA) dangerous goods regulations. These regulations are especially relevant when handling specimens potentially infected with HIV, ensuring safe transport and minimizing risks of exposure.8
Upon arrival at the laboratory, the integrity of the specimen must be immediately assessed. Laboratory personnel should inspect the tube and its contents for any signs of damage or compromise. If the specimen feels unusually warm or cold but shows no visible hemolysis (rupture of red blood cells) or freezing, it can still be processed, but the temperature condition should be carefully documented on both the laboratory worksheet and the final report. However, specimens exhibiting hemolysis, freezing, or visible clots must be rejected due to potential inaccuracies. In such cases, a new blood sample must be collected to ensure reliable aids diagnosis cd4 count results.9
While fasting is generally not required for CD4 count testing, it is crucial to address any patient anxieties and provide emotional support, particularly given the potentially significant implications of the test results. Obtaining informed consent and maintaining clear communication with the patient before testing are fundamental aspects of responsible patient care in the context of HIV and aids diagnosis cd4 count assessment.10
CD4 Count Testing Procedures: Flow Cytometry
Several laboratory techniques can be employed to determine the absolute number of CD4 T lymphocytes. Among these, immunofluorescence analysis by flow cytometry is recognized as the gold standard method for accurate aids diagnosis cd4 count determination. Flow cytometry leverages fluorochrome-labeled probes that specifically bind to cellular components. For CD4 cell counting, the CD4 T lymphocytes are stained with fluorescent labels detectable by the flow cytometer. Monoclonal antibodies, highly specific, are used to target and bind to the CD4 receptor present on the surface of T cells.
The flow cytometer analyzes the sample and quantifies the relative percentage of cells expressing the CD4 receptor. Results are initially reported as CD4 percentages. To obtain the absolute CD4 cell count, crucial for aids diagnosis cd4 count interpretation, this percentage is multiplied by the total white blood cell count obtained from a complete blood count (CBC). For instance, a CD4 percentage greater than 29% typically corresponds to an absolute CD4 cell count exceeding 500 cells/mm3, considered within the normal range. Conversely, a CD4 percentage below 14% is indicative of a significantly reduced absolute CD4 count, falling below 200 cells/mm3, a critical threshold for AIDS diagnosis.11,12
Alternative CD4 counting systems, manufactured by various companies, are also available. It is essential for healthcare providers to be aware of the specific technique used by their laboratory, as absolute CD4 count values may vary slightly depending on the methodology. Caution is advised when comparing or interpreting results obtained from different testing methods, especially when using aids diagnosis cd4 count as a critical clinical marker.
Factors Influencing CD4 Cell Count
Physicians and patients should be aware of various factors that can influence CD4 cell counts, potentially affecting the interpretation of aids diagnosis cd4 count results. Changes in the total white blood cell count directly impact the absolute CD4 count, as it is calculated based on the percentage of CD4 cells within the total white blood cell population. Normal biological variations, such as circadian rhythms, can also affect lymphocyte counts. Studies have demonstrated that CD4 counts are typically lower in the morning and tend to increase throughout the day.13
Acute infections, such as influenza, pneumonia, hepatitis B, and cytomegalovirus (CMV), as well as chemotherapy treatments, can lead to a temporary decrease in CD4 cell counts. These transient reductions are due to the body’s immune response to infection or treatment effects on the bone marrow.14 Psychological stress and fatigue can also interfere with CD4 count results, potentially lowering the count. Interestingly, corticosteroids, medications often used to reduce inflammation or suppress the immune system, can have complex effects on CD4 cells. Single doses of corticosteroids may cause a temporary decline in the absolute CD4 count. Conversely, chronic steroid use may paradoxically lead to an elevated CD4 count. Other factors that warrant consideration when interpreting CD4 counts include alcohol consumption, nicotine use, and pregnancy, as these conditions can also alter absolute CD4 cell levels.15
These interfering factors can cause both the percentage and absolute CD4 cell count to fluctuate. However, the CD4 cell percentage generally exhibits less variability compared to the absolute number. Therefore, in situations where fluctuations are a concern, the CD4 percentage may be considered a more stable parameter. If CD4 count results are significantly lower than expected or discordant with the clinical picture, especially in the context of aids diagnosis cd4 count, it is advisable to confirm the results with a repeat test within 3 to 6 months to account for potential transient variations.16
Understanding CD4 Count Results and Clinical Significance
The normal CD4 count range is broadly defined as 500 to 1500 cells/mm3. In untreated HIV infection, CD4 levels can progressively decline. A CD4 count dropping below 200 cells/mm3 is a critical threshold, serving as a key indicator for aids diagnosis cd4 count and signifying a significantly compromised immune system. The wide normal range reflects the inherent variability arising from the three components contributing to the absolute CD4 count: the white blood cell count, the percentage of lymphocytes within the white blood cell population, and the percentage of lymphocytes expressing the CD4 receptor.17,18
Clinically, the CD4 count is essential for evaluating the progression of HIV infection. It is recommended that all individuals newly diagnosed with HIV undergo CD4 count testing at the time of diagnosis to establish a baseline. The Public Health Service guidelines recommend regular CD4 monitoring for all HIV-positive patients, typically every 3 to 6 months. These repeated measurements help track disease progression, assess the risk of opportunistic infections, and guide treatment decisions. A low CD4 count, particularly below 200 cells/mm3, strongly suggests the possibility of AIDS and a heightened risk of opportunistic infections, which are infections that take advantage of a weakened immune system.
Furthermore, the CD4 count serves as an important indicator of treatment efficacy. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) should ideally be initiated before CD4 levels fall below 200 cells/mm3 to minimize the risk of complications associated with advanced immunosuppression. Following the initiation of ART, CD4 levels should be monitored every 3 to 6 months to evaluate the patient’s response to treatment. A successful response to ART is typically characterized by an increase in CD4 count and indicates adherence to the prescribed medication regimen. With effective ART, CD4 levels may increase by 100 to 150 cells/mm3 within the first year of treatment, reflecting immune reconstitution and improved immune function.19,20 Therefore, CD4 count monitoring is integral to both aids diagnosis cd4 count assessment and ongoing management of HIV infection.
Quality Control and Safety in CD4 Count Testing
Maintaining the accuracy and reliability of CD4+ T-lymphocyte test results is paramount, both within individual laboratories and to ensure comparability across different testing facilities. Standardized testing methods, coupled with comprehensive quality control (QC) and quality assurance (QA) guidelines, are essential for achieving this goal.21 Laboratories performing CD4 count testing must rigorously monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of their policies and procedures throughout all phases of the testing process. This includes meticulous attention to specimen collection, handling, transportation, identification, processing, and storage protocols.
In addition to specimen handling, QC and QA measures must encompass test request and report forms, quality control protocols for laboratory instruments and reagents, accurate review and reporting of test results, and comprehensive employee training programs.22 High-quality training for laboratory personnel can be achieved through a combination of basic instruction provided by flow cytometer manufacturers and advanced hands-on workshops designed for both operators and supervisors.
Immunophenotyping, the technique used in flow cytometry for CD4 counting, requires stringent quality control measures to guarantee both accuracy and reliability. Negative (isotype) reagent controls are critical for distinguishing non-specific antibody binding from specific antibody-target interactions. These controls utilize antibodies that lack specificity for human antigens but share the same isotype and fluorochrome characteristics as the test reagents. By using isotype controls, laboratories can effectively identify and account for background signals, ensuring accurate measurement of specific antibody binding. Positive methodological controls are used to validate the entire specimen preparation and processing workflow. These controls involve analyzing whole blood samples from a control donor with known CD4 counts and comparing the results against established normal ranges. This step verifies the proper functioning of the entire testing process, from sample preparation to data acquisition. Furthermore, positive controls for testing reagents are used to assess the labeling efficiency and overall functionality of new reagent lots. This is achieved by comparing the performance of new reagent lots to previously validated lots, ensuring consistency and reliability of reagent performance over time.23
Daily instrument quality control is crucial for ensuring the consistent and accurate performance of flow cytometers used for aids diagnosis cd4 count testing. One key aspect of daily QC is the alignment of the instrument’s optics to optimize peak brightness and signal detection. This is typically achieved using stable calibration materials, such as fluorochrome-labeled microbeads. These beads ensure precise alignment of calibration particles with the laser beam and collection lens, maximizing signal intensity and resolution. Stream-in-air flow cytometers generally require daily alignment due to their optical design, while stream-in-cuvette models may follow manufacturer-recommended guidelines for alignment frequency.24 Daily standardization tasks are also essential and involve the use of stable materials to maintain consistent scatter and fluorescence peak positioning over time. Retaining these standardization settings is crucial for preserving instrument sensitivity and spectral compensation, which are critical for accurate data analysis. Sensitivity assessments are performed to evaluate the cytometer’s ability to distinguish dim fluorescent signals from background autofluorescence. This is achieved by analyzing materials with low-level fluorescence, ensuring proper separation of positive and negative populations and accurate detection of dim signals.25
In the event of instrument malfunctions or after any servicing or maintenance, all four QC procedures—alignment, calibration, sensitivity checks, and compensation—must be repeated to ensure the instrument is performing optimally before resuming clinical testing. Comprehensive logs documenting instrument settings, peak channel values, and coefficient of variation (CV) values should be meticulously maintained. These logs serve as valuable records for monitoring instrument performance trends over time and for re-establishing fluorescence levels when calibration materials or bead lots are replaced, ensuring consistent data quality and comparability across different runs.26
In addition to adhering to internal QC and calibration procedures, laboratories performing CD4 testing must also participate in external quality assessment (EQA) programs. These programs, often provided by national or international organizations, provide blinded specimens to participating laboratories for analysis. Laboratories then analyze these specimens and submit their results for comparison against reference standards or peer group results. EQA programs are invaluable for identifying potential errors in laboratory procedures, uncovering procedural inconsistencies between laboratories, and ultimately ensuring the accuracy and reliability of CD4 testing practices across the wider laboratory network.27
Laboratory policies and procedures related to CD4 testing and quality assurance should be reviewed and revised regularly, either as needed based on identified issues or at predefined intervals (e.g., annually). Regular reviews ensure ongoing compliance with best practices and evolving quality standards. Any issues or areas for improvement identified during quality assurance reviews should be promptly communicated to all relevant laboratory staff. Furthermore, corrective actions taken to address these issues and prevent recurrence should be clearly documented and communicated to maintain a culture of continuous quality improvement.28
Strict adherence to universal precautions is mandatory when handling all patient specimens to ensure laboratory safety and minimize the risk of contamination or exposure to potentially hazardous materials, including HIV-infected blood. Establishing and consistently implementing comprehensive safety protocols is essential for protecting laboratory personnel. Laboratory staff must always wear appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), including laboratory coats and gloves, during all stages of specimen processing and analysis. Pipetting by mouth is strictly prohibited; safety pipetting devices must be used to prevent accidental ingestion or exposure to potentially infectious materials.29 Used needles should never be recapped, as recapping increases the risk of needlestick injuries. Needles and other sharps must be promptly disposed of in puncture-proof sharps containers to mitigate the risk of accidental injury and potential exposure to bloodborne pathogens.30 Specimen processing should be performed within certified Class I or II biological safety cabinets. These cabinets provide a contained environment that protects both the user from exposure to aerosols and the samples from external contamination, ensuring optimal safety and sample integrity.31
Safety carriers should be used when centrifuging specimens to prevent spills and potential aerosol release in case of tube breakage. After handling any specimens, thorough handwashing with soap and water is essential to remove any potential contaminants and maintain hygiene.32 For stream-in-air flow cytometers, it is particularly important to adhere to manufacturer guidelines regarding waste disposal and aerosol containment to minimize the risk of aerosol or droplet exposure during instrument operation. Waste generated by flow cytometers should be appropriately disinfected before disposal. A common disinfection method involves adding undiluted household bleach (typically 5% sodium hypochlorite) to waste containers to achieve a final concentration of 0.5% sodium hypochlorite. This disinfection process can be effectively accomplished by diluting the bleach at a ratio of 1:10 (1 part bleach to 9 parts water) for effective decontamination of liquid waste. These multifaceted safety measures are crucial for maintaining a safe laboratory environment, protecting personnel from potential biohazards, and ensuring the quality and integrity of specimens undergoing analysis for aids diagnosis cd4 count and other clinical purposes.23
Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes Through CD4 Count Awareness
The CD4 count is a critical laboratory parameter for assessing patients with compromised immune systems, particularly those with HIV infection. Nurse practitioners, primary care physicians, and other healthcare providers play a vital role in understanding the clinical significance of CD4 counts and their implications for patient care. Healthcare professionals should be thoroughly familiar with the normal range of CD4 counts (500 to 1500 cells/mm³) to effectively recognize deviations that may indicate immunosuppression and potential aids diagnosis cd4 count.
Routine CD4 testing is recommended for all patients at the time of initial HIV diagnosis. This baseline CD4 count is essential for establishing the patient’s initial immune status and monitoring disease progression over time. According to Public Health Service guidelines, regular CD4 monitoring, typically every 3 to 6 months, is recommended for HIV-positive patients. This ongoing monitoring allows healthcare providers to track changes in immune function, assess the risk of opportunistic infections, and make informed decisions regarding treatment strategies. A CD4 count below 200 cells/mm³ is a defining criterion for AIDS diagnosis and indicates a significantly elevated risk of life-threatening opportunistic infections and malignancies. Beyond its diagnostic value in aids diagnosis cd4 count, the CD4 count is also a crucial marker for evaluating the success or failure of antiretroviral therapy. Changes in CD4 count in response to treatment provide valuable insights into treatment effectiveness and patient adherence, guiding ongoing clinical management and optimization of therapeutic strategies.
Review Questions
(Note: Review questions from the original article are omitted as per instructions.)
References
(Note: References from the original article are retained as per instructions.)
1.Nacher M, Huber F, Adriouch L, Djossou F, Adenis A, Couppié P. Temporal trend of the proportion of patients presenting with advanced HIV in French Guiana: stuck on the asymptote? BMC Res Notes. 2018 Nov 26;11(1):831. [PMC free article: PMC6258272] [PubMed: 30477588]
2.Carr A, Richardson R, Liu Z. Success and failure of initial antiretroviral therapy in adults: an updated systematic review. AIDS. 2019 Mar 01;33(3):443-453. [PubMed: 30475265]
3.Graham NM, Park LP, Piantadosi S, Phair JP, Mellors J, Fahey JL, Saah AJ. Prognostic value of combined response markers among human immunodeficiency virus-infected persons: possible aid in the decision to change zidovudine monotherapy. Clin Infect Dis. 1995 Feb;20(2):352-62. [PubMed: 7742442]
4.Li R, Duffee D, Gbadamosi-Akindele MF. StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing; Treasure Island (FL): May 1, 2023. CD4 Count. [PubMed: 29262137]
5.Vajpayee M, Kaushik S, Sreenivas V, Wig N, Seth P. CDC staging based on absolute CD4 count and CD4 percentage in an HIV-1-infected Indian population: treatment implications. Clin Exp Immunol. 2005 Sep;141(3):485-90. [PMC free article: PMC1809467] [PubMed: 16045738]
6.Fajardo E, Metcalf C, Mbofana E, van Vyve C, Munyaradzi D, Simons S, Kuhudzayi M, Bygrave H. Opportunities to improve storage and transportation of blood specimens for CD4 testing in a rural district in Zimbabwe using BD vacutainer CD4 stabilization tubes: a stability and diagnostic accuracy study. BMC Infect Dis. 2014 Oct 22;14:553. [PMC free article: PMC4209078] [PubMed: 25330812]
7.Simundic AM, Bölenius K, Cadamuro J, Church S, Cornes MP, van Dongen-Lases EC, Eker P, Erdeljanovic T, Grankvist K, Guimaraes JT, Hoke R, Ibarz M, Ivanov H, Kovalevskaya S, Kristensen GBB, Lima-Oliveira G, Lippi G, von Meyer A, Nybo M, De la Salle B, Seipelt C, Sumarac Z, Vermeersch P., Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE), of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) and Latin American Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE-LATAM) of the Latin America Confederation of Clinical Biochemistry (COLABIOCLI). Joint EFLM-COLABIOCLI Recommendation for venous blood sampling. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2018 Nov 27;56(12):2015-2038. [PubMed: 30004902]
8.Cornish NE, Anderson NL, Arambula DG, Arduino MJ, Bryan A, Burton NC, Chen B, Dickson BA, Giri JG, Griffith NK, Pentella MA, Salerno RM, Sandhu P, Snyder JW, Tormey CA, Wagar EA, Weirich EG, Campbell S. Clinical Laboratory Biosafety Gaps: Lessons Learned from Past Outbreaks Reveal a Path to a Safer Future. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2021 Jun 16;34(3):e0012618. [PMC free article: PMC8262806] [PubMed: 34105993]
9.Wan Azman WN, Omar J, Koon TS, Tuan Ismail TS. Hemolyzed Specimens: Major Challenge for Identifying and Rejecting Specimens in Clinical Laboratories. Oman Med J. 2019 Mar;34(2):94-98. [PMC free article: PMC6425048] [PubMed: 30918601]
10.Kackov S, Simundic AM, Gatti-Drnic A. Are patients well informed about the fasting requirements for laboratory blood testing? Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2013;23(3):326-31. [PMC free article: PMC3900081] [PubMed: 24266303]
11.Vogler IH, Alfieri DF, Gianjacomo HDB, Almeida ERD, Reiche EMV. Safety of monitoring antiretroviral therapy response in HIV-1 infection using CD4+ T cell count at long-term intervals. Cad Saude Publica. 2018 Oct 22;34(10):e00009618. [PubMed: 30365742]
12.Chan CK, Wong KH, Lee MP, Chan KC, Leung CC, Leung EC, Chan WK, Mak IK. Risk factors associated with 1-year mortality among patients with HIV-associated tuberculosis in areas with intermediate tuberculosis burden and low HIV prevalence. Hong Kong Med J. 2018 Oct;24(5):473-483. [PubMed: 30262675]
13.Montarroyos UR, Miranda-Filho DB, César CC, Souza WV, Lacerda HR, Albuquerque Mde F, Aguiar MF, Ximenes RA. Factors related to changes in CD4+ T-cell counts over time in patients living with HIV/AIDS: a multilevel analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(2):e84276. [PMC free article: PMC3914785] [PubMed: 24505247]
14.Guo Z, Zhang Z, Prajapati M, Li Y. Lymphopenia Caused by Virus Infections and the Mechanisms Beyond. Viruses. 2021 Sep 20;13(9) [PMC free article: PMC8473169] [PubMed: 34578457]
15.Akinbami AA, Gbadegesin A, Ajibola SO, Uche EI, Dosunmu AO, Adediran A, Sobande A. Factors influencing CD4 cell count in HIV-positive pregnant women in a secondary health center in Lagos, Nigeria. HIV AIDS (Auckl). 2015;7:115-8. [PMC free article: PMC4401335] [PubMed: 25914558]
16.Hull MW, Rollet K, Odueyungbo A, Saeed S, Potter M, Cox J, Cooper C, Gill J, Klein MB., Canadian Co-infection Cohort Investigators. Factors associated with discordance between absolute CD4 cell count and CD4 cell percentage in patients coinfected with HIV and hepatitis C virus. Clin Infect Dis. 2012 Jun;54(12):1798-805. [PubMed: 22460964]
17.Schooley AL, Kamudumuli PS, Vangala S, Tseng CH, Soko C, Parent J, Phiri K, Jahn A, Namarika D, Hoffman RM. CD4 Variability in Malawi: Implications for Use of a CD4 Threshold of 500 Cells/mm3 Versus Universal Eligibility for Antiretroviral Therapy. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2016 Sep;3(3):ofw180. [PMC free article: PMC5047419] [PubMed: 27704028]
18.Ying R, Granich RM, Gupta S, Williams BG. CD4 Cell Count: Declining Value for Antiretroviral Therapy Eligibility. Clin Infect Dis. 2016 Apr 15;62(8):1022-8. [PMC free article: PMC5006297] [PubMed: 26826372]
19.Dosemane D, Kumar V, Madi D, Kanthila J. Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection: Does Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Influence Ear Nose Throat Manifestations? Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018 Dec;70(4):555-558. [PMC free article: PMC6224825] [PubMed: 30464915]
20.Sadiq U, Shrestha U, Guzman N. StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing; Treasure Island (FL): May 22, 2023. Prevention of Opportunistic Infections in HIV/AIDS. [PubMed: 30020717]
21.Stebbings R, Wang L, Sutherland J, Kammel M, Gaigalas AK, John M, Roemer B, Kuhne M, Schneider RJ, Braun M, Engel A, Dikshit DK, Abbasi F, Marti GE, Sassi MP, Revel L, Kim SK, Baradez MO, Lekishvili T, Marshall D, Whitby L, Jing W, Ost V, Vonsky M, Neukammer J. Quantification of cells with specific phenotypes I: determination of CD4+ cell count per microliter in reconstituted lyophilized human PBMC prelabeled with anti-CD4 FITC antibody. Cytometry A. 2015 Mar;87(3):244-53. [PMC free article: PMC4654269] [PubMed: 25655255]
22.Sciacovelli L, Padoan A, Aita A, Basso D, Plebani M. Quality indicators in laboratory medicine: state-of-the-art, quality specifications and future strategies. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2023 Mar 28;61(4):688-695. [PubMed: 36660807]
23.Cossarizza A, Chang HD, Radbruch A, Akdis M, Andrä I, Annunziato F, Bacher P, Barnaba V, Battistini L, Bauer WM, Baumgart S, Becher B, Beisker W, Berek C, Blanco A, Borsellino G, Boulais PE, Brinkman RR, Büscher M, Busch DH, Bushnell TP, Cao X, Cavani A, Chattopadhyay PK, Cheng Q, Chow S, Clerici M, Cooke A, Cosma A, Cosmi L, Cumano A, Dang VD, Davies D, De Biasi S, Del Zotto G, Della Bella S, Dellabona P, Deniz G, Dessing M, Diefenbach A, Di Santo J, Dieli F, Dolf A, Donnenberg VS, Dörner T, Ehrhardt GRA, Endl E, Engel P, Engelhardt B, Esser C, Everts B, Dreher A, Falk CS, Fehniger TA, Filby A, Fillatreau S, Follo M, Förster I, Foster J, Foulds GA, Frenette PS, Galbraith D, Garbi N, García-Godoy MD, Geginat J, Ghoreschi K, Gibellini L, Goettlinger C, Goodyear CS, Gori A, Grogan J, Gross M, Grützkau A, Grummitt D, Hahn J, Hammer Q, Hauser AE, Haviland DL, Hedley D, Herrera G, Herrmann M, Hiepe F, Holland T, Hombrink P, Houston JP, Hoyer BF, Huang B, Hunter CA, Iannone A, Jäck HM, Jávega B, Jonjic S, Juelke K, Jung S, Kaiser T, Kalina T, Keller B, Khan S, Kienhöfer D, Kroneis T, Kunkel D, Kurts C, Kvistborg P, Lannigan J, Lantz O, Larbi A, LeibundGut-Landmann S, Leipold MD, Levings MK, Litwin V, Liu Y, Lohoff M, Lombardi G, Lopez L, Lovett-Racke A, Lubberts E, Ludewig B, Lugli E, Maecker HT, Martrus G, Matarese G, Maueröder C, McGrath M, McInnes I, Mei HE, Melchers F, Melzer S, Mielenz D, Mills K, Mirrer D, Mjösberg J, Moore J, Moran B, Moretta A, Moretta L, Mosmann TR, Müller S, Müller W, Münz C, Multhoff G, Munoz LE, Murphy KM, Nakayama T, Nasi M, Neudörfl C, Nolan J, Nourshargh S, O’Connor JE, Ouyang W, Oxenius A, Palankar R, Panse I, Peterson P, Peth C, Petriz J, Philips D, Pickl W, Piconese S, Pinti M, Pockley AG, Podolska MJ, Pucillo C, Quataert SA, Radstake TRDJ, Rajwa B, Rebhahn JA, Recktenwald D, Remmerswaal EBM, Rezvani K, Rico LG, Robinson JP, Romagnani C, Rubartelli A, Ruckert B, Ruland J, Sakaguchi S, Sala-de-Oyanguren F, Samstag Y, Sanderson S, Sawitzki B, Scheffold A, Schiemann M, Schildberg F, Schimisky E, Schmid SA, Schmitt S, Schober K, Schüler T, Schulz AR, Schumacher T, Scotta C, Shankey TV, Shemer A, Simon AK, Spidlen J, Stall AM, Stark R, Stehle C, Stein M, Steinmetz T, Stockinger H, Takahama Y, Tarnok A, Tian Z, Toldi G, Tornack J, Traggiai E, Trotter J, Ulrich H, van der Braber M, van Lier RAW, Veldhoen M, Vento-Asturias S, Vieira P, Voehringer D, Volk HD, von Volkmann K, Waisman A, Walker R, Ward MD, Warnatz K, Warth S, Watson JV, Watzl C, Wegener L, Wiedemann A, Wienands J, Willimsky G, Wing J, Wurst P, Yu L, Yue A, Zhang Q, Zhao Y, Ziegler S, Zimmermann J. Guidelines for the use of flow cytometry and cell sorting in immunological studies. Eur J Immunol. 2017 Oct;47(10):1584-1797. [PMC free article: PMC9165548] [PubMed: 29023707]
24.Perfetto SP, Ambrozak D, Nguyen R, Chattopadhyay PK, Roederer M. Quality assurance for polychromatic flow cytometry using a suite of calibration beads. Nat Protoc. 2012 Dec;7(12):2067-79. [PubMed: 23138348]
25.Wang L, Hoffman RA. Standardization, Calibration, and Control in Flow Cytometry. Curr Protoc Cytom. 2017 Jan 05;79:1.3.1-1.3.27. [PubMed: 28055116]
26.Kalina T, Flores-Montero J, van der Velden VH, Martin-Ayuso M, Böttcher S, Ritgen M, Almeida J, Lhermitte L, Asnafi V, Mendonça A, de Tute R, Cullen M, Sedek L, Vidriales MB, Pérez JJ, te Marvelde JG, Mejstrikova E, Hrusak O, Szczepański T, van Dongen JJ, Orfao A., EuroFlow Consortium (EU-FP6, LSHB-CT-2006-018708). EuroFlow standardization of flow cytometer instrument settings and immunophenotyping protocols. Leukemia. 2012 Sep;26(9):1986-2010. [PMC free article: PMC3437409] [PubMed: 22948490]
27.Barnett D, Whitby L, Wong J, Louzao R, Reilly JT, Denny TN. VERITAS?: A time for VERIQAS™ and a new approach to training, education, and the quality assessment of CD4+ T lymphocyte counting (I). Cytometry B Clin Cytom. 2012 Mar;82(2):93-100. [PMC free article: PMC4126193] [PubMed: 21998025]
28.Ezzelle J, Rodriguez-Chavez IR, Darden JM, Stirewalt M, Kunwar N, Hitchcock R, Walter T, D’Souza MP. Guidelines on good clinical laboratory practice: bridging operations between research and clinical research laboratories. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2008 Jan 07;46(1):18-29. [PMC free article: PMC2213906] [PubMed: 18037599]
29.Ta L, Gosa L, Nathanson DA. Biosafety and Biohazards: Understanding Biosafety Levels and Meeting Safety Requirements of a Biobank. Methods Mol Biol. 2019;1897:213-225. [PMC free article: PMC7120677] [PubMed: 30539447]
30.Anandadurai D, Praisie R, Venkateshvaran S, Nelson SB, Thulasiram M. Awareness, Perception, and Practice Regarding Needle-Stick Injury and Its Prevention Among Healthcare Workers in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Southern India. Cureus. 2024 Mar;16(3):e55820. [PMC free article: PMC10999507] [PubMed: 38590462]
31.Jagtap GA, Badge A, Kohale MG, Wankhade RS. The Role of the Biosafety Cabinet in Preventing Infection in the Clinical Laboratory. Cureus. 2023 Dec;15(12):e51309. [PMC free article: PMC10823295] [PubMed: 38288229]
32.Burnett LC, Lunn G, Coico R. Biosafety: guidelines for working with pathogenic and infectious microorganisms. Curr Protoc Microbiol. 2009 May;Chapter 1(1):Unit 1A.1. [PMC free article: PMC7162325] [PubMed: 19412909]
Disclosures: (Note: Disclosures from the original article are retained as per instructions.)
Disclosure: Sofia Battistini Garcia declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.
Disclosure: Muhammad Zubair declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.
Disclosure: Nilmarie Guzman declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.
