[Surgical principles in the treatment of diverticular disease].

F. Fischer,H. Bruch

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/S-2006-955448

2006-12-01

Zentralblatt für Chirurgie

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Evaluation of an in-clinic dry chemistry analyzer for canine, equine, and feline plasma samples

Katie M Boes,Carolyn A Sink,Melinda S Camus,Stephen R Werre,Katie M. Boes,Carolyn A. Sink,Melinda S. Camus,Stephen R. Werre

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1040638718809407

2018-10-20

Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation

Abstract:Method validation studies characterize the performance of new laboratory methods relative to established methods using quality guidelines in order to define the new method’s performance characteristics and to identify differences that could influence data interpretation. We investigated the performance of an in-clinic dry chemistry analyzer (Catalyst One, IDEXX) for measuring 19 routine plasma biochemistry analytes in dogs, cats, and horses. We analyzed 2 levels of quality control material (QCM) in duplicate twice daily for 5 d to determine the coefficient of variation (CV), percent bias, observed total error (TE obs ), and sigma metric (σ) for each analyte at each level of QCM. We analyzed 82 canine, equine, and feline plasma samples with the in-clinic dry chemistry analyzer and a reference wet chemistry analyzer, and results were compared using correlation coefficients, Deming regression, and Bland–Altman analyses. CVs were <5% for 16 analytes and ⩾5% for 3 analytes. TE obs was less than allowable total error (TE a ) for 9 analytes, and exceeded TE a for 10 analytes. Sigma metrics were >4 at both levels of QCM for 5 analytes, and at one level of QCM for 5 analytes; sigma metrics were <3 or could not be calculated at the remaining analyte concentrations. All analytes, except glucose, showed various magnitudes of bias compared to the wet chemistry analyzer. Based on these results, we recommend statistical (5 analytes) and non-statistical (14 analytes) QC measures and analyzer-specific reference intervals.

veterinary sciences
College of American Pathologists Quality Cross Check —Chemistry and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring as a tool for biannual instrument correlations

Megan S Pater,Júlia A Hernandez,Joesph R Wiencek

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmad111

IF: 1.865

2024-01-13

Laboratory Medicine

Abstract:Abstract Background Biannual instrument-correlation studies are required for nonwaived assays performed on multiple instruments. Objective To determine the feasibility of using College of American Pathologists (CAP) Quality Cross Check—Chemistry and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (CZQ) to assess instrument correlations among multiple analyzers, analyzer models, and Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) licenses for 55 unique analytes. Methods Instrument correlation studies were performed on 9 Abbott ARCHITECT instruments (c4000 [n = 4], c8000 [n = 2], and c16000 [n = 3]) over 3 CLIA licenses using CZQ materials. The mean (SD) values, concentration difference, percent bias, and peer data for each individual level of CZQ were determined for each individual analyzer. Acceptable concentration and percentage for each analyte were set using criteria from CAP or other reputable sources such as the American Association of Bioanalysts or the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia. Peer data were provided by CAP with the CZQ kit. Results Correlations using CZQ materials showed that 94.5% of assays studied were within the acceptability criteria by percent bias only and 98.2% were within acceptability criteria by concentration difference. Conclusions The use of CZQ provides support to standardized correlation studies among instruments within and across separate CLIA licenses. However, widespread adoption of CZQ may be limited due to concerns regarding matrix effects, analyte ranges, and ease of data analysis.

medical laboratory technology
A-101 Is That Unexpected? Education on Handling Real World Complications with Tightly Controlled Analytes During Method Evaluation

S A Love,J Aguanno,J Melchior,R Burnett,T Muldowney,A Von Rotz,A Guerrero,M Pollan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvae106.100

IF: 12.114

2024-10-27

Clinical Chemistry

Abstract:BackgroundA common activity in clinical laboratories is performance evaluations. Given the importance for a new analyzer being put into clinical use, this exercise typically requires extensive preparation with significant time and resources invested to bring on new instrumentation. During early adoption, studies examined real-world performance and comparability of the Atellica® CI Analyzer (Atellica CI) to clinically used instruments. Precision, linearity, and method comparison (MC) studies, conducted in accordance with CLSI protocols, were completed at several locations installing new instruments to examine the analytical performance of common clinical laboratory assays. This work examines the impact of using only unmodified specimens to verify performance during method comparison for tightly controlled biological analytes like electrolytes and illustrates the impact of the tested sample range on regression analysis.MethodsTesting was completed using unmodified, de-identified, remnant patient serum specimens. The MC studies for these electrolytes were completed over multiple days using single replicates from at least 40 individual specimens, on two instruments, the Atellica CI and the Dimension® EXL in accordance with CLSI EP09-3A. The effect of sample range on regression was demonstrated through data restriction and inclusion of modified sample results within the data analysis. Data analysis was completed using Analyse-it for Microsoft Excel (version 6.15.4).ResultsRepresentative method comparison data for sodium, chloride, and potassium found slope differences were more pronounced when sample concentrations were more limited. Individual assay slopes were determined using Deming linear regression model and comparisons between restricted samples show the effects of sample range on regression and correlation parameters.ConclusionsUnderstanding the relationship between sample range and regression analysis is helpful to illustrate an important fundamental concept of method comparison. These examples illustrate the importance in covering as much of the analytical measuring interval as possible and the impact on regression analysis when samples are narrowly grouped.

medical laboratory technology
B-112 Regression Analysis Techniques for Assessing Calibration Reproducibility Within and Between Instruments. A Practical Example with Blood Ca2+ Assayed with Two cobas® b 221Analyzers

V Genta,J Francia,P Darville

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvae106.473

IF: 12.114

2024-10-27

Clinical Chemistry

Abstract:BackgroundReproducibility of the calibration curve within the analytical measurement range (AMR) is crucial for ensuring reliable patient values within and between laboratory instruments to detect shifts and trends of clinical significance. In this practical example for ionized calcium (Ca2+) assayed with two cobas b221® instruments, the equality of calibration lines and the verification with patient specimen comparison study was assessed with regression analysis techniques.MethodsInstruments: Two cobas b 221 (Roche Diagnostics). Calibration material: COOX/MSSTM (Five levels, Roche Diagnostics). This was independently assayed either three or five times in parallel with both instruments. The patient specimens were obtained by venipuncture in Na/Li-heparin BDTM tubes (Becton-Dickinson). Upon receipt, specimens were assayed with both instruments within two minutes. The data were transferred to Minitab® (Version 21, Minitab Inc) statistical software and analyzed with polynomial ordinary least squares (POLS), orthogonal and locally weighted scatterplot smoother (lowess) regression analysis models. The aptness of the model was assessed with standardized residuals (std. res.) diagnostics. For acceptable total error the CLIA's criterion target value ± 10% was adopted.ResultsWhile the POLS model did not show probabilistically significant differences between instruments (P=0.8), it showed probabilistically significant differences between years (P=0.003). However, this was due to a small MSE (= 0.003 mg/dL), which is not clinically significant. The test for linearity showed probabilistically significant lack-of-fit (P<0.0001) due to a small MS pure error ( |3|) and no influential observations (Hi |3|) and no influential observations. Additionally, the plot of the relative differences between the values as obtained with b221#9371 and b221#24796 by the values as obtained with b221#9371 showed only one value exceeding half of the total allowable error.ConclusionsThe POLS model clearly showed that the calibration lines for the two instruments were quasi-linear in the interval 2-10 mg/dL and reproducible within and between instruments. Additionally, this reliable performance was verified with patient specimens in the interval 3-6 mg/dL. The differences between values as obtained with each instrument were within half of the CLIA's total allowable error. This clearly showed that equality of calibration lines ensured interchangeable patient values between instruments. Finally, electronic transfer of data and the availability of statistical software like Minitab was crucial for conducting this study.

medical laboratory technology
Bias due to Preanalytical Dilution of Rodent Serum for Biochemical Analysis on the Siemens Dimension Xpand Plus

Jennifer L. Johns,Kaitlin A. Moorhead,Jing Hu,Roberta C. Moorhead

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2018.00003

IF: 3.471

2018-02-15

Frontiers in Veterinary Science

Abstract:Clinical pathology testing of rodents is often challenging due to insufficient sample volume. One solution in clinical veterinary and exploratory research environments is dilution of samples prior to analysis. However, published information on the impact of preanalytical sample dilution on rodent biochemical data is incomplete. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of preanalytical sample dilution on biochemical analysis of mouse and rat serum samples utilizing the Siemens Dimension Xpand Plus. Rats were obtained from end of study research projects. Mice were obtained from sentinel testing programs. For both, whole blood was collected via terminal cardiocentesis into empty tubes and serum was harvested. Biochemical parameters were measured on fresh and thawed frozen samples run straight and at dilution factors 2-10. Dilutions were performed manually, utilizing either ultrapure water or enzyme diluent per manufacturer recommendations. All diluted samples were generated directly from the undiluted sample. Preanalytical dilution caused clinically unacceptable bias in most analytes at dilution factors four and above. Dilution-induced bias in total calcium, creatinine, total bilirubin, and uric acid was considered unacceptable with any degree of dilution, based on the more conservative of two definitions of acceptability. Dilution often caused electrolyte values to fall below assay range precluding evaluation of bias. Dilution-induced bias occurred in most biochemical parameters to varying degrees and may render dilution unacceptable in the exploratory research and clinical veterinary environments. Additionally, differences between results obtained at different dilution factors may confound statistical comparisons in research settings. Comparison of data obtained at a single dilution factor is highly recommended.

veterinary sciences
Ensure the accuracy and consistency of biochemical analyzer test results: Chemometrics for instrument and inter-instrument item comparison in Chinese hospital laboratory

Xue-Dong Song,Shou-Xia Li,Zhi-Mei Qin,Ding-Li Chen,Li-Li Guo,Cai-Ru Liu,Xiao Yang,Ke-Nan Peng,Er-Hei Dai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24306

IF: 3.776

2024-01-06

Heliyon

Abstract:Biochemical analyzers are vital instruments that utilize the principle of photoelectric colorimetry to quantify a specific chemical composition in body fluids. This analysis provides critical data for the diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, and overall health status of various diseases in clinical practice. However, the performance of a biochemical analyzer can vary significantly between different brands or over time within the same brand. Therefore, it is imperative to regularly assess the performance of the analyzer to ensure consistent results for longitudinal studies and to maintain day-to-day data consistency. Additionally, when multiple analyzers are utilized, it is necessary to evaluate the performance of each instrument to ensure accurate results across multiple platforms. In this study, we developed and verified an experimental evaluation scheme for the analytical performance of the instrument, chemometrics for biochemical analyzers, utilizing national reference materials and patient sera as the experimental subjects. We evaluated the performance of the optical system, temperature control system, sample-adding system, and detection system to confirm the feasibility of this scheme. We also compared the analytical performance of different brands of biochemical analyzers for routine biochemical tests, such as liver function, kidney function, ion, blood lipids, blood glucose, and myocardial enzyme spectrum. Using the AU 5400 as a control and the ADVIA 2400 as the comparison system, the relative variation in inter-instrument comparison data was found to be acceptable at the clinical medicine decision level. In conclusion, the performance of a biochemical analyzer can vary significantly between different brands or over time within the same brand. Regular evaluations are necessary to ensure accurate and consistent results across different analyzers. This study provides a feasible scheme for evaluating the analytical performance of biochemical analyzers that can be used to ensure the accuracy and consistency of the results of different brands of automatic chemical analyzers in the laboratory.
Using Bland-Altman plot-based harmonization algorithm to optimize the harmonization for immunoassays

Huiling Fang,Ruifeng Yang,Jiayue Guo,Xinxin Ren,Xin Chang,Lan Kang,Yuqing Zhu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2024-0187

2024-05-16

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Abstract:Objectives Harmonization has been recommended by the International Organization for Standard (ISO) to achieve equivalent results across in vitro diagnostic measurement devices (IVD-MDs). We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of Bland-Altman plot-based harmonization algorithm (BA-BHA) created in this study and compare it with weighted Deming regression-based harmonization algorithm (WD-BHA) proposed in ISO 21151:2020. Methods Eighty patient sera were used as the harmonization reference material (HRM) to develop IVD-MD-specific harmonization algorithms. Another panel of 40 patient sera was used to validate the effectiveness of harmonization algorithms. We compared regression slopes, intercepts, Bland-Altman plot layouts, percent differences, limits of agreement (LoAs), between-method coefficients of variation (CV) before and after harmonization. Results After harmonization by WD-BHA, acceptable slopes and intercepts between measured values and HRM targets were observed in weighted Deming regression, but not in Passing-Bablok analysis. Mean differences were −5.5 to 5.0 % and differences at specific levels were −33.9 to 23.9 %. LoAs were −64.6 to 74.6 %. Between-method CV was 22.9 % (±12.9 %). However, after harmonization by BA-BHA, both weighted Deming and Passing-Bablok regressions equations presented harmonized results. Mean differences were −0.3 to 0.2 % and differences at specific levels were −1.1 to 1.6 %. LoAs were −23.3 to 23.2 %. Between-method CV was 8.4 % (±4.0 %). The data points were evenly distributed at both sides of the mean in Bland-Altman plots. Conclusions The inequivalence of test results between different methods can be improved but unacceptable analytical differences at specific levels may be hidden in terms of an acceptable slope and intercept on WD-BHA. The new protocol BA-BHA may be a viable alternative to optimize the harmonization for immunoassays.

medical laboratory technology
Continued harmonization of the international normalized ratio across a large laboratory network: Evidence of sustained low interlaboratory variation and bias after a change in instrumentation

Emmanuel J Favaloro,Sandya Arunachalam,Kent Chapman,Leonardo Pasalic

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqae090

2024-07-18

American Journal of Clinical Pathology

Abstract:Abstract Objectives Our objective was to maintain low interlaboratory variation and bias in international normalized ratio (INR) results following a network change in instrumentation and reagents, using a process of ongoing standardization and harmonization. Methods Network-wide standardization to new common instrument and reagent platforms followed by network-wide application of a simple novel process of verification of international sensitive index and mean normal prothrombin time values for each new lot of prothrombin time (PT) reagent that does not require use of World Health Organization reference thromboplastin or INR calibration/certified plasma. Results The network transitioned from mechanical hemostasis detection instruments with associated PT reagent (Diagnostica Stago; NeoPTimal) to optical detection (ACL TOPs) with associated PT reagent (Werfen; RecombiPlasTin 2G). Comparing 3 years of data for each situation, the network (n = 27 laboratories) maintained low INR variability and bias relative to general mechanical and optical groups and other laboratories. Conclusions Harmonized support for patient management of vitamin K antagonists such as warfarin was continuously maintained in our geography, with potentially positive implications for other coagulation laboratories and geographies. For the United States in particular, paucity of US Food and Drug Administration–cleared INR certified plasmas potentially compromises INR test accuracy; our novel approach may provide workable alternatives for other laboratories/networks.

pathology
Quantitative Evaluation of the Real-World Harmonization Status of Laboratory Test Items Using External Quality Assessment Data

Sollip Kim,Tae-Dong Jeong,Kyunghoon Lee,Jae-Woo Chung,Eun-Jung Cho,Seunghoo Lee,Sail Chun,Junghan Song,Won-Ki Min

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3343/alm.2024.0082

2024-11-01

Abstract:Background: In recent decades, the analytical quality of clinical laboratory results has substantially increased because of collaborative efforts. To effectively utilize laboratory results in applications, such as machine learning through big data, understanding the level of harmonization for each test would be beneficial. We aimed to develop a quantitative harmonization index that reflects the harmonization status of real-world laboratory tests. Methods: We collected 2021-2022 external quality assessment (EQA) results for eight tests (HbA1c, creatinine, total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, triglyceride, alpha-fetoprotein [AFP], carcinoembryonic antigen [CEA], and prostate-specific antigen [PSA]). This EQA was conducted by the Korean Association of External Quality Assessment Service, using commutable materials. The total analytical error of each test was determined according to the bias% and CV% within peer groups. The values were divided by the total allowable error from biological variation (minimum, desirable, and optimal) to establish a real-world harmonization index (RWHI) at each level (minimum, desirable, and optimal). Good harmonization was arbitrarily defined as an RWHI value ≤ 1 for the three levels. Results: Total cholesterol, triglyceride, and CEA had an optimal RWHI of ≤ 1, indicating an optimal harmonization level. Tests with a desirable harmonization level included HDL-cholesterol, AFP, and PSA. Creatinine had a minimum harmonization level, and HbA1c did not reach the minimum harmonization level. Conclusions: We developed a quantitative RWHI using regional EQA data. This index may help reflect the actual harmonization level of laboratory tests in the field.
Harmonization in laboratory medicine: more than clinical chemistry?

Mario Plebani

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2017-0865

2017-11-02

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Abstract:Abstract The goal of harmonizing laboratory information is to contribute to quality in patient care, ultimately improving upon patient outcomes and safety. The main focus of harmonization and standardization initiatives has been on analytical processes within the laboratory walls, clinical chemistry tests in particular. However, two major evidences obtained in recent years show that harmonization should be promoted not only in the analytical phase but also in all steps of the testing process, encompassing the entire field of laboratory medicine, including innovative areas (e.g. “omics”) rather than just conventional clinical chemistry tests. A large body of evidence demonstrates the vulnerability of the extra-analytical phases of the testing cycle. Because only “good biological samples” can assure good analytical quality, a closer interconnection between the different phases of the cycle is needed. In order to provide reliable and accurate laboratory information, harmonization activities should cover all steps of the cycle from the “pre-pre-analytical” phase (right choice of test at right time for right patient) through the analytical steps (right results with right report) to the “post-post-analytical” steps (right and timely acknowledgment of laboratory information, right interpretation and utilization with any necessary advice as to what to do next with the information provided). In addition, modern clinical laboratories are performing a broad menu of hundreds of tests, covering both traditional and innovative subspecialties of the discipline. In addition, according to a centered viewpoint, harmonization initiatives should not be addressed exclusively to clinical chemistry tests but should also include all areas of laboratory medicine.
Evaluation of ComBat harmonization for reducing across-tracer differences in regional amyloid PET analyses

Braden Yang,Tom Earnest,Sayantan Kumar,Deydeep Kothapalli,Tammie Benzinger,Brian Gordon,Aristeidis Sotiras

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.06.14.24308952

2024-10-07

Abstract:Introduction Differences in amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) radiotracer pharmacokinetics and binding properties lead to discrepancies in amyloid-β uptake estimates. Harmonization of tracer-specific biases is crucial for optimal performance of downstream tasks. Here, we investigated the efficacy of ComBat, a data-driven harmonization model, for reducing tracer-specific biases in regional amyloid PET measurements from [18F]-florbetapir (FBP) and [11C]-Pittsburgh Compound-B (PiB). Methods One-hundred-thirteen head-to-head FBP-PiB scan pairs, scanned from the same subject within ninety days, were selected from the Open Access Series of Imaging Studies 3 (OASIS-3) dataset. The Centiloid scale, ComBat with no covariates, ComBat with biological covariates, and GAM-ComBat with biological covariates were used to harmonize both global and regional amyloid standardized uptake value ratios (SUVR). Variants of ComBat, including longitudinal ComBat and PEACE, were also tested. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and mean absolute error (MAE) were computed to measure the absolute agreement between tracers. Additionally, longitudinal amyloid SUVRs from an anti-amyloid drug trial were simulated using linear mixed effects modeling. Differences in rates-of-change between simulated treatment and placebo groups were tested, and change in statistical power/Type-I error after harmonization was quantified. Results In the head-to-head tracer comparison, ComBat with no covariates was the best at increasing ICC and decreasing MAE of both global summary and regional amyloid PET SUVRs between scan pairs of the same group of subjects. In the clinical trial simulation, harmonization with both Centiloid and ComBat increased statistical power of detecting true rate-of-change differences between groups and decreased false discovery rate in the absence of a treatment effect. The greatest benefit of harmonization was observed when groups exhibited differing FBP-to-PiB proportions. Conclusion ComBat outperformed the Centiloid scale in harmonizing both global and regional amyloid estimates. Additionally, ComBat improved the detection of rate-of-change differences between clinical trial groups. Our findings suggest that ComBat is a viable alternative to Centiloid for harmonizing regional amyloid PET analyses.

Radiology and Imaging
[Clinico-biological impact of pS2 positivity in estrogen receptor negative-infiltrating ductal carcinomas of the breast].

Á. Ruibal,J. Arias,M. D. Del Río,J. San Román,G. Lapeña,C. Pardo,A. Tejerina

Revista Española de Medicina Nuclear

Abstract:UNLABELLED The pS2 protein is regulated by estrogens, but it can also be expressed in hormone independent breast carcincomas. We have carried out the present study in order to analyze the clinical-biological impact of pS2 positivity (>2 ng/mg prt.) in negative estrogen receptors (< 10 fmol/mg prt.) infiltrating ductal breast carcinomas (IDC). MATERIAL AND METHODS 97 negative ER-IDC have been included in our study. We established the doses of the cytosol levels of pS2, progesterone receptors (PR), cathepsin D, tissue -type plasminogen activator (t-PA) and hyaluronic acid (HA), as well as the levels of HA, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), CD44v5 and CD44v6 in cell surface membranes. We also considered the menopausal status, histological grade, ploidy, cellular synthesis phase, tumor size, axillary lymph node involvement and the existence of distant metastasis. The same results were obtained when the progesterone receptor status was also considered. RESULTS ER-/pS2+ IDC presented higher (p <0,05) PR, t-PA and HA cytosol level, as well as lower EGFR concentrations, S-phase > 7% and S-phase >14% and lower N+>10 percentages and aneuploidy. They were also more frequently CD44v6+. The same results were observed when the positivity of the progesterone receptors was considered. CONCLUSIONS The above results lead us to consider that the positivity for pS2 in ER- IDC is associated with hormone-dependent parameters, good differentiation and lower cellular proliferation, which can explain a better clinical outcome.
Harmonization of distributed multi‐center analysis based on dried blood spot reference materials supporting the screening of neonatal inherited metabolic disorders

Shou‐Fang Qu,Hao‐Ran Tao,Liu‐Ji Qin,Wen‐Xin Zhang,Shan Han,Shen‐Yan Zhang,Jie Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jcla.24970

IF: 3.124

2023-10-15

Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis

Abstract:The flowchart outlines our research process. A range of evaluations were carried out after the development of DBS reference materials, which are applicable to correct the results of diverse laboratories, kits and platforms. We anticipate our products will ensure dependable harmonization and standardization for multi‐center metabolism analysis in the future. Background The standardization of quantification data is critical for ensuring the reliability and measurement traceability in the screening of neonatal inherited metabolic disorders. However, the availability of national certified reference materials is limited in China. Methods In this study, we developed a series of dried blood spot (DBS) reference materials containing 9 amino acids (AA) and 10 acylcarnitines (AC) for neonatal screening. Four levels of the reference materials were measured with tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) by seven laboratories using different commercial In Vitro Diagnostic Device (IVD) kits. Then, 100 clinical samples were measured using both derivatization and non‐derivatization methods by the same laboratory. Results We found high homogeneity and stability at all levels of the reference materials, with the coefficient of variation (CV) of the analytes less than 15%. These reference materials can be used to assess the testing capabilities of different laboratories. Our test also revealed that the correction factors (CF) calculated by the reference materials, along with clinical samples, could increase the consistency for different kits. Conclusion The DBS reference materials proposed in this study provide reliability for the harmonization in multi‐center analysis for the screening of neonatal inherited metabolic disorders. And applying our correction method for the screening could improve the data consistency of the DBS samples prepared by different methods.

medical laboratory technology
Investigating the Current Harmonization Status of Tumor Markers Using Global External Quality Assessment Programs: A Feasibility Study

Huub H van Rossum,Stefan Holdenrieder,Bart E P B Ballieux,Tony C Badrick,Yeo-Min Yun,Chuanbao Zhang,Dina Patel,Marc Thelen,Junghan Song,Nathalie Wojtalewicz,Nick Unsworth,Hubert W Vesper,Wei Cui,Lakshmi V Ramanathan,Catharine Sturgeon,Qing H Meng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvae005

IF: 12.114

2024-02-22

Clinical Chemistry

Abstract:Abstract Background The harmonization status of most tumor markers (TMs) is unknown. We report a feasibility study performed to determine whether external quality assessment (EQA) programs can be used to obtain insights into the current harmonization status of the tumor markers α-fetoprotein (AFP), prostate specific antigen (PSA), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), cancer antigen (CA)125, CA15-3 and CA19-9. Methods EQA sample results provided by 6 EQA providers (INSTAND [Germany], Korean Association of External Quality Assessment Service [KEQAS, South Korea], National Center for Clinical Laboratories [NCCL, China], United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Service [UK NEQAS, United Kingdom], Stichting Kwaliteitsbewaking Medische Laboratoriumdiagnostiek [SKML, the Netherlands], and the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Programs [RCPAQAP, Australia]) between 2020 and 2021 were used. The consensus means, calculated from the measurement procedures present in all EQA programs (Abbott Alinity, Beckman Coulter DxI, Roche Cobas, and Siemens Atellica), was used as reference values. Per measurement procedure, the relative difference between consensus mean for each EQA sample and the mean of all patient-pool–based EQA samples were calculated and compared to minimum, desirable, and optimal allowable bias criteria based on biological variation. Results Between 19040 (CA15-3) and 25398 (PSA) individual results and 56 (PSA) to 76 (AFP) unique EQA samples were included in the final analysis. The mean differences with the consensus mean of patient-pool–based EQA samples for all measurement procedures were within the optimum bias criterion for AFP, the desirable bias for PSA, and the minimum bias criterion for CEA. However, CEA results <8 μg/L exceeded the minimum bias criterion. For CA125, CA15-3, and CA19-9, the harmonization status was outside the minimum bias criterion, with systematic differences identified. Conclusions This study provides relevant information about the current harmonization status of 6 tumor markers. A pilot harmonization investigation for CEA, CA125, CA15-3, and CA19-9 would be desirable.

medical laboratory technology
A model for managing quality control for a network of clinical chemistry instruments measuring the same analyte

Jean-Marc Giannoli,Mathieu Bernard,Julien L’Hirondel,André Heim,Tony Badrick

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2023-0965

2023-11-24

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Abstract:Abstract Objectives Monitoring quality control for a laboratory or network with multiple instruments measuring the same analyte is challenging. We present a retrospective assessment of a method to detect medically significant out-of-control error conditions across a group of instruments measuring the same analyte. The purpose of the model was to ensure that results from any of several instruments measuring the same analytes in a laboratory or a network of laboratories provide comparable results and reduce patient risk. Limited literature has described how to manage QC in these very common situations. Methods Single Levey–Jennings control charts were designed using peer group target mean and control limits for five common clinical chemistry analytes in a network of eight analyzers in two different geographical sites. The QC rules used were 1 3s /2 2s /R 4s , with the mean being a peer group mean derived from a large population of the same instrument and the same QC batch mean and a group CV. The peer group data used to set the target means and limits were from a quality assurance program supplied by the instrument supplier. Both statistical and clinical assessments of significance were used to evaluate QC failure. Instrument bias was continually monitored. Results It was demonstrated that the biases of each instrument were not statistically or clinically different compared to the peer group’s average over six months from February 2023 until July 2023. Over this period, the error rate determined by the QC model was consistent with statistical expectations for the 1 3s /2 2s /R 4s rule. There were no external quality assurance failures, and no detected error exceeded the TEa (medical impact). Thus, the combined statistical/clinical assessment reduced unnecessary recalibrations and the need to amend results. Conclusions This paper describes the successful implementation of a quality control model for monitoring a network of instruments, measuring the same analytes and using externally provided quality control targets. The model continually assesses individual instrument bias and imprecision while ensuring all instruments in the network meet clinical goals for quality. The focus of this approach is on detecting medically significant out-of-control error conditions.

medical laboratory technology
Observations from a national sample exchange program for molecular haematology testing

Clare Gould,Michelle McBean,Ella Thompson,Jennifer Lickiss,Ing Soo Tiong,David Westerman,Piers Blombery

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pathol.2023.12.413

IF: 5.335

2024-02-01

Pathology

Abstract:External quality assessment programs (EQAP) for molecular haematology generally only assess the analytical phase of laboratory testing or provide limited evaluation of post-analytical components. We incorporated comprehensive post-analytical evaluation into an existing national inter-laboratory sample exchange program for molecular haematology due to the increasing complexity of diagnostic molecular testing and interpretation. We report key findings from four years of longitudinal data using this approach. Eighteen participating laboratories enrolled in an annual reciprocal sample exchange program from 2019-2022, which covered conventional and next-generation sequencing (NGS) assays. Participants submitted results on their laboratory information system-generated reports which then underwent central review. Reports were assessed according to consensus values and relevant national and international reporting standards and guidelines. A total of 680 reports were received. Laboratories had high concordance in the analytical phase of testing, with incorrect variant detection observed in a total of six of 680 (0.9%) reports. In contrast, post-analytical concordance was much lower, with at least one discordance observed in 28.9-57.6% of all conventional reports and 33.3-100% NGS reports. The most frequent post-analytical discordances were: (1) not including key technical information on reports (total 41.9% conventional, 47.2% NGS); (2) not using standard gene and variant nomenclature (total 28.2% conventional, 25.6% NGS). NGS reports also demonstrated discrepancies in variant classification (total 20.4%) and interpretation (total 10.2%). The rate of discrepancies generally improved year-on-year. Inter-laboratory concordance for molecular haematology testing is high in the analytical phase, however opportunities exist for improvement in the post-analytical phase. Given that result interpretation is crucial for clinical decision-making and that molecular testing is a complex and evolving field, we suggest that EQAPs should comprehensively evaluate both analytical and post-analytical components of laboratory performance in order to harmonise reporting and to support the accurate interpretation of molecular haematology tests.

pathology
Harmonization of the Results of Automated Coagulation Tests with Different Analyzers

YAN Cun-liang,PENG Li-ming,HUANG Hai-xiong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3321/j.issn:1009-9158.2008.01.026

2008-01-01

Abstract:Objective To investigate the harmonization of results of Prothrombin time(PT),International Normalized Ratio(INR),activated partial thromboplastin time(APTT),fibrinogen(FIB)and thrombin time(TT)with different coagulation analyzers in different or sanle clinical laboratory.Methods PT,INR,Am,FIB and TT for the same quality control material were detected with 14 different coagulation analyzers,which are distributed in 12 clinical laboratories and classified into A,B and C group.MeaJlwhile,PT,INR,APTT,FIB of 139 samples were detected with two different coagulation aJlalyzers in the same laboratory.Results There was no significant difference for detection of level 3 of both INR and TT among the three group analyzers(P＞0.05),but there was significant difference for other tests (P＜0.05).The comparison between groups showed that there was high percentage(66.7%)of consistency for detection of INR,FIB-C and TT between group B and C.The results of two different coagulation analvzers ( ACL Futura and CA 510)in same laboratory showed that there was no significant difference(P＞0.05)for detection of PT,INR,PT-FIB and FIB-C between them,and there was good eorrelation for them in detecting PT,INR,APTT,PT-FIB and FIB-C(r＞0.975).Analysis of bias showed that the bias of PT,INR,PT-FIB and FIBC between the two different coagulation analyzers was acceptable according to CLIA'88.Conclusion There are good agreement for the results between different coagulation analyzers based upon the similar Drinciple in coagulation analysis.
Pediatric reference interval verification for 16 biochemical markers on the Alinity ci system in the CALIPER cohort of healthy children and adolescents

Mary Kathryn Bohn,Randal Schneider,Benjamin Jung,Khosrow Adeli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2023-0256

2023-04-30

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Abstract:Objectives Special chemistry parameters are useful in the diagnosis and management of inherited disorders, liver disease, and immunopathology. Evidence-based pediatric reference intervals (RIs) are required for appropriate clinical decision-making and need to be verified as new assays are developed. This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of pediatric RIs established for biochemical markers on the ARCHITECT for use on newer Alinity assays. Methods An initial method validation was completed for 16 assays, including precision, linearity, and method comparison. Sera collected from approximately 100 healthy children and adolescents as part of the Canadian Laboratory Initiative on Pediatric Reference Intervals (CALIPER) were also analyzed on the Alinity c system. Percentage of results within established ARCHITECT RIs were calculated and considered verified if ≥90 % fell within established limits. New RIs were established for three electrolytes, glucose, and lactate wherein no data were previously reported. Results Of the 11 assays for which CALIPER pediatric RIs were previously established on ARCHITECT assays, 10 met the verification criteria. Alpha-1-antitrypsin did not meet verification criterion and a new RI was established. For the other 5 assays, de novo RIs were derived following analysis of 139–168 samples from healthy children and adolescents. None required age- and sex-partitioning. Conclusions Herein, pediatric RIs were verified or established for 16 chemistry markers in the CALIPER cohort on Alinity assays. Findings support excellent concordance between ARCHITECT and Alinity assays with one exception (alpha-1-antitrypsin) as well as robustness of age- and sex-specific patterns originally reported by CALIPER in healthy Canadian children and adolescents.

medical laboratory technology
Sharing reference intervals and monitoring patients across laboratories – findings from a likely commutable external quality assurance program

Christopher J.L. Farrell,Graham R.D. Jones,Kenneth A. Sikaris,Tony Badrick,Peter Graham,Jonathan Bush

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2024-0041

2024-03-06

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Abstract:Laboratory results are increasingly interpreted against common reference intervals (CRIs), published clinical decision limits, or previous results for the same patient performed at different laboratories. However, there are no established systems to determine whether current analytical performance justifies these interpretations. We analysed data from a likely commutable external quality assurance program (EQA) to assess these interpretations. The use of CRIs was assessed by evaluating instrument group medians against minimum specifications for bias. The use of clinical decision limits was assessed using specifications from professional bodies, and the monitoring of patients by testing at different laboratories was assessed by comparing all-laboratory imprecision to within-subject biological variation. Five of the 18 analytes with Australasian CRIs did not meet specification for all instrument groups. Among these, calcium and magnesium failed for one instrument group out of seven, while bicarbonate, chloride, and lipase failed for two instrument groups. Of the 18 analytes reviewed currently without CRIs in Australasia, 10 candidates were identified. Among analytes with clinical decision limits, i.e. lipids, glucose, and vitamin D, only triglycerides met both bias and imprecision specifications, while vitamin D met the imprecision specification. Monitoring patients by testing at different laboratories was supported for 15 of the 46 (33 %) analyte-method principles groups that met minimum imprecision specifications. Analysis of data from commutable EQA programs can provide a mechanism for monitoring whether analytical performance justifies the interpretations made in contemporary laboratory practice. EQA providers should establish systems for routinely providing this information to the laboratory community.

medical laboratory technology
A study of spectral integration and normalization in NMR-based metabonomic analyses

Bobbie-Jo M Webb-Robertson,David F Lowry,Kristin H Jarman,Sam J Harbo,Q Ryan Meng,Alfred F Fuciarelli,Joel G Pounds,K Monica Lee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpba.2005.05.012

2005-09-15

Abstract:Metabonomics involves the quantitation of the dynamic multivariate metabolic response of an organism to a pathological event or genetic modification [J.K. Nicholson, J.C. Lindon, E. Holmes, Xenobiotica 29 (1999) 1181-1189]. The analysis of these data involves the use of appropriate multivariate statistical methods; Principal Component Analysis (PCA) has been documented as a valuable pattern recognition technique for 1H NMR spectral data [J.T. Brindle, H. Antti, E. Holmes, G. Tranter, J.K. Nicholson, H.W. Bethell, S. Clarke, P.M. Schofield, E. McKilligin, D.E. Mosedale, D.J. Grainger, Nat. Med. 8 (2002) 1439-1444; B.C. Potts, A.J. Deese, G.J. Stevens, M.D. Reily, D.G. Robertson, J. Theiss, J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 26 (2001) 463-476; D.G. Robertson, M.D. Reily, R.E. Sigler, D.F. Wells, D.A. Paterson, T.K. Braden, Toxicol. Sci. 57 (2000) 326-337; L.C. Robosky, D.G. Robertson, J.D. Baker, S. Rane, M.D. Reily, Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 5 (2002) 651-662]. Prior to PCA the raw data is typically processed through four steps; (1) baseline correction, (2) endogenous peak removal, (3) integration over spectral regions to reduce the number of variables, and (4) normalization. The effect of the size of spectral integration regions and normalization has not been well studied. The variability structure and classification accuracy on two distinctly different datasets are assessed via PCA and a leave-one-out cross-validation approach under two normalization approaches and an array of spectral integration regions. The first dataset consists of urine from 15 male Wistar-Hannover rats dosed with ANIT measured at five time points, mimicking drug-induced cholangiolitic hepatitis [D.G. Robertson, M.D. Reily, R.E. Sigler, D.F. Wells, D.A. Paterson, T.K. Braden, Toxicol. Sci. 57 (2000) 326-337; J.P. Shockcor, E. Holmes, Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2 (2002) 35-51; N.J. Waters, E. Holmes, A. Williams, C.J. Waterfield, R.D. Farrant, J.K. Nicholson, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 14 (2001) 1401-1412]. The second data is serum samples from young male C57BL/6 mice subjected to instillation of pancreatic elastase producing emphysema type symptoms [C. Kuhn, S.Y. Yu, M. Chraplyvy, H.E. Linder, R.M. Senior, Lab. Invest. 34 (1976) 372-380; C. Kuhn, R.M. Senior, Lung 155 (1978) 185-197]. This study indicates that independent of the normalization method the classification accuracy achieved from metabonomic studies is not highly sensitive to the size of the spectral integration region. Additionally, both datasets scaled to mean zero and unity variance (auto-scaled) have higher variability within classification accuracy over spectral integration window widths than data scaled to the total intensity of the spectrum. Of the top 10 latent variables for the ANIT dataset the auto-scale normalization has standard deviations larger than the total-scale in seven cases. In the case of the elastase all standard deviations are larger for the auto-scaling.

[Surgical principles in the treatment of diverticular disease].

Evaluation of an in-clinic dry chemistry analyzer for canine, equine, and feline plasma samples

College of American Pathologists Quality Cross Check —Chemistry and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring as a tool for biannual instrument correlations

A-101 Is That Unexpected? Education on Handling Real World Complications with Tightly Controlled Analytes During Method Evaluation

B-112 Regression Analysis Techniques for Assessing Calibration Reproducibility Within and Between Instruments. A Practical Example with Blood Ca2+ Assayed with Two cobas® b 221Analyzers

Bias due to Preanalytical Dilution of Rodent Serum for Biochemical Analysis on the Siemens Dimension Xpand Plus

Ensure the accuracy and consistency of biochemical analyzer test results: Chemometrics for instrument and inter-instrument item comparison in Chinese hospital laboratory

Using Bland-Altman plot-based harmonization algorithm to optimize the harmonization for immunoassays

Continued harmonization of the international normalized ratio across a large laboratory network: Evidence of sustained low interlaboratory variation and bias after a change in instrumentation

Quantitative Evaluation of the Real-World Harmonization Status of Laboratory Test Items Using External Quality Assessment Data

Harmonization in laboratory medicine: more than clinical chemistry?

Evaluation of ComBat harmonization for reducing across-tracer differences in regional amyloid PET analyses

[Clinico-biological impact of pS2 positivity in estrogen receptor negative-infiltrating ductal carcinomas of the breast].

Harmonization of distributed multi‐center analysis based on dried blood spot reference materials supporting the screening of neonatal inherited metabolic disorders

Investigating the Current Harmonization Status of Tumor Markers Using Global External Quality Assessment Programs: A Feasibility Study

A model for managing quality control for a network of clinical chemistry instruments measuring the same analyte

Observations from a national sample exchange program for molecular haematology testing

Harmonization of the Results of Automated Coagulation Tests with Different Analyzers

Pediatric reference interval verification for 16 biochemical markers on the Alinity ci system in the CALIPER cohort of healthy children and adolescents

Sharing reference intervals and monitoring patients across laboratories – findings from a likely commutable external quality assurance program

A study of spectral integration and normalization in NMR-based metabonomic analyses