Search

In addition to the correct implementation of calibration traceability, the definition and fulfillment of maximum allowable measurement uncertainty (MAU) are essential in assuring that laboratory measurements are clinically usable. Across the entire calibration hierarchy, three major contributors to the measurement uncertainty (MU) budget are identified, starting with the higher-order reference providers, extending through the in vitro diagnostic (IVD) manufacturers and their processes for assigning calibrator values, and ending with medical laboratories generating the random variability of results reported to clinicians. To understand if it is possible to achieve MAU and, consequently, to fix the possible drawbacks, the definition of combined MU budget limits across the entire calibration hierarchy has a central role. In particular, quality specifications for MU of reference and commercial calibrator materials should be defined according to the MAU on clinical samples. All involved stakeholders (i.e., higher-order reference providers, IVD manufacturers, medical laboratories) should be prepared to improve their performance whenever the clinical application of the test is made questionable by the failure to achieve MAU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To be accurate and equivalent among assays, laboratory results should be traceable to higher-order references and their quality should fulfill maximum allowable measurement uncertainty (MU) as defined to fit the intended clinical use. Accordingly, laboratory professionals should estimate and validate MU of performed tests using appropriate analytical performance specifications (APS). Current consensus supports the derivation of APS by using one of the three models established by the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Strategic Conference held in Milan in 2014. It is recognized that some models are better suited for certain measurands than for others and the attention should be primarily directed towards their biological and clinical characteristics. Among others, model 3 should reflect the state of the art of the measurements that can be defined as the best analytical performance that is technically achievable. Taking serum C-reactive protein and ferritin as examples, here we describe the theoretical premises and the experimental protocol to be used to derive APS for MU when a measurand is allocated to this model. Although the model lacks a direct relationship with clinical outcomes, useful information about the in vitro diagnostic medical device performance and the average quality of provided results may be obtained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Analytical performance specifications (APS) represent the criteria that specify the quality required for laboratory test information to satisfy clinical needs. In 2014 the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) considered timely to update the topic of APS by organizing a conference in Milan in which some strategic concepts were proposed. Here I summarize the essential points representing the EFLM Strategic Conference heritage and discuss the approaches that will permit us to become more concrete, including roles and main actions expected from each of involved stakeholders for contributing a quantum leap forward in the way of practicality of Milan consensus about APS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document discusses the concept of analytical performance specifications (APS) in laboratory medicine. It provides an overview of previous conferences and consensus documents on setting APS, including the 2014 EFLM Strategic Conference. The 2023 CELME conference aimed to explore the three models from the Milan conference and offer practical recommendations for their application. The document emphasizes the importance of APS in ensuring harmonized medical laboratory results for patient care. It also discusses the challenges in determining measurement uncertainty and the need for education on APS usage. The document concludes by highlighting important questions for further consideration, such as the creation of a single database for APS and the intended use and aspirational nature of APS. [Extracted from the article]

Non-harmonization of laboratory results represents a concrete risk for patient safety. To avoid harms, it is agreed that measurements by in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVD-MD) on clinical samples should be traceable to higher-order references and adjusted to give the same result. However, metrological traceability is not a formal claim and has to be correctly implemented, which in practice does not happen for a non-negligible number of measurands. Stakeholders, such as higher-order reference providers, IVD manufacturers, and External Quality Assessment organizers, have major responsibilities and should improve their contribution by unambiguously and rigorously applying what is described in the International Organization for Standardization 17511:2020 standard and other documents provided by the international scientific bodies, such as Joint Committee on Traceability in Laboratory Medicine and IFCC. For their part, laboratory professionals should take responsibility to abandon non-selective methods and move to IVD-MDs displaying proper selectivity, which is one of the indispensable prerequisites for the correct implementation of metrological traceability. The practicality of metrological traceability concepts is not impossible but relevant education and appropriate training of all involved stakeholders are essential to obtain the expected benefits in terms of standardization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

* Context.--A relevant portion of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients develop severe disease with negative outcomes. Several biomarkers have been proposed to predict COVID-19 severity, but no definite interpretative criteria have been established to date for stratifying risk. Objective.--To evaluate 6 serum biomarkers (C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, D-dimer, albumin, ferritin, and cardiac troponin T) for predicting COVID-19 severity and to define related cutoffs able to aid clinicians in risk stratification of hospitalized patients. Design.--A retrospective study of 427 COVID-19 patients was performed. Patients were divided into groups based on their clinical outcome: nonsurvivors versus survivors and patients admitted to an intensive care unit versus others. Receiver operating characteristic curves and likelihood ratios were employed to define predictive cutoffs for evaluated markers. Results.--Marker concentrations at peak were significantly different between groups for both selected outcomes. At univariate logistic regression analysis, all parameters were significantly associated with higher odds of death and intensive care. At the multivariate analysis, high concentrations of lactate dehydrogenase and low concentrations of albumin in serum remained significantly associated with higher odds of death, whereas only low lactate dehydrogenase activities remained associated with lower odds of intensive care admission. The best cutoffs for death prediction were greater than 731 U/L for lactate dehydrogenase and 18 g/L or lower for albumin, whereas a lactate dehydrogenase activity lower than 425 U/L was associated with a negative likelihood ratio of 0.10 for intensive treatment. Conclusions.--Our study identifies which biochemistry tests represent major predictors of COVID-19 severity and defines the best cutoffs for their use. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2020-0389-SA, At the end of 2019, an outbreak of atypical pneumonia of unknown cause was detected in Wuhan, the capital of the province of Hubei, China. (1) The etiologic agent of [...]

The article discusses the need to refresh and integrate the entries for total bilirubin in the Joint Committee on Traceability in Laboratory Medicine (JCTLM) database. The authors highlight concerns about the two reference measurement procedures (RMPs) listed in the database and the lack of measurement uncertainty reported for one of them. They also mention the importance of suitable commutable matrix certified reference materials (CRMs) and the need for improved standardization of total bilirubin measurements. The authors emphasize the significance of metrological traceability and the potential impact on clinical applications, particularly in neonatal medicine. [Extracted from the article]

According to ISO 15189:2022, analytical performance specifications (APS) should relate to intended clinical use and impact on patient care. Therefore, we aimed to develop a web application for laboratory professionals to calculate APS based on a simulation of the impact of measurement uncertainty (MU) on the outcome using the chosen decision limits, agreement thresholds, and data of the population of interest. We developed the "APS Calculator" allowing users to upload and select data of concern, specify decision limits and agreement thresholds, and conduct simulations to determine APS for MU. The simulation involved categorizing original measurand concentrations, generating measured (simulated) results by introducing different degrees of MU, and recategorizing measured concentrations based on clinical decision limits and acceptable clinical misclassification rates. The agreements between original and simulated result categories were assessed, and values that met or exceeded user-specified agreement thresholds that set goals for the between-category agreement were considered acceptable. The application generates contour plots of agreement rates and corresponding MU values. We tested the application using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data, with decision limits from relevant guidelines. We determined APS for MU of six measurands (blood total hemoglobin, plasma fasting glucose, serum total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and total folate) to demonstrate the potential of the application to generate APS. The developed data-driven web application offers a flexible tool for laboratory professionals to calculate APS for MU using their chosen decision limits and agreement thresholds, and the data of the population of interest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document discusses the measurement uncertainty (MU) of total protein in urine (TPU) and its importance in evaluating the quality of laboratory results. The ISO Technical Specification 20914 provides guidance for estimating MU, but information about MU of TPU is lacking. The study applied this approach to four commercial measuring systems for TPU and found that the MU on clinical samples was consistent across the systems. However, there are challenges in defining the measurand and establishing metrological traceability. The study suggests that the performance of the evaluated systems could be used to establish analytical performance specifications for TPU. [Extracted from the article]

Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) represents the first-level test to detect individuals with hepatocellular damage of any etiology. However, it has been highlighted that the lack of assay harmonization may lead to overdiagnosis and unnecessary further testing if guideline-recommended fixed cut-offs are uncritically employed. To solve the issue of ALT (dis)harmonization and improve the interpretation of its values, a series of urgent actions for documenting and validating metrological traceability of serum ALT measurements, as described in this paper, are no longer postponeable. It is time that all medical laboratory stakeholders (in vitro diagnostic manufacturers, laboratorians, external quality assessment scheme organizers) actively co-operate to implement the ALT standardization in a concerted action following well-established theoretical assumptions and applying experimental approaches described in literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently, Abbott Diagnostics marketed a new generation of Alinity enzyme assays, introducing a multiparametric calibrator [Consolidated Chemistry Calibrator (ConCC)] in place of or in addition to factor-based calibrations. For alkaline phosphatase (ALP), both calibration options are offered, i.e., with ConCC (ALP2) and with an experimental calibration factor (ALP2F). Both options are declared traceable to the 2011 IFCC reference measurement procedure (RMP). Before to replace the old generation (ALP1) with the new one, we decided to validate the trueness of ALP2/ALP2F. Three approaches were employed: (a) preliminary comparison on 48 native frozen serum samples with ALP1, of which traceability to RMP was previously successfully verified; (b) examination of three banked serum pools (BSP) with values assigned by RMP; (c) direct comparison with RMP on a set of 24 fresh serum samples. Bias estimation and regression studies were performed, and the standard measurement uncertainty associated with ALP measurements on clinical samples (uresult) was estimated and compared with established analytical performance specifications (APS). ConCC commutability was also assessed. A positive proportional bias was found with both ALP2 and ALP2F when compared to ALP1 and RMP. This positive bias was confirmed on BSP: in average, +13.1 % for ALP2 and +10.0 % for ALP2F, respectively. uresult were 13.28 % for ALP2 and 10.04 % for ALP2F, both not fulfilling the minimum APS of 4.0 %. Furthermore, ConCC was not commutable with clinical samples. Our results unearth problems in the correct implementation of traceability of Alinity ALP2/ALP2F, with the risk for the new assay to be unfit for clinical purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) may progress to advanced liver fibrosis (ALF). We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of a novel Liver Fibrosis Risk Index (LFRI) in MAFLD subjects using transient elastography (TE) as the reference method for liver fibrosis measurement and then the diagnostic performance of a new two-step non-invasive algorithm for the detection of ALF risk in MAFLD, using Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) followed by LFRI and comparing it to the reference algorithm based on FIB-4 and TE. We conducted a prospective study on 104 MAFLD European adult subjects. All consenting subjects underwent TE and measurements of FIB-4 and LFRI. For FIB-4 and TE, validated cut-offs were used. An ROC analysis showed that LFRI diagnosed severe fibrosis with moderate accuracy in MAFLD subjects with a negative predictive value above 90%. Using the new algorithm with LFRI thresholds recommended by the manufacturer, the number of subjects classified into ALF risk groups (low, intermediate, or high) differed significantly when compared with the reference algorithm (p = 0.001), with moderate agreement between them (weighted kappa (95% CI) = 0.59 (0.41–0.77)). To improve the performance of the LFRI-based algorithm, we modified cut-off points based on ROC curves obtained by dividing the study population according to the reference algorithm and observed no difference between algorithms (p = 0.054) in categorizing ALF risk, with a slight increase in the total agreement (weighted kappa (95% CI) = 0.63 (0.44–0.82)). Our findings suggest that using the novel LFRI as a second-line test may represent a potential alternative for liver fibrosis risk stratification in MAFLD patients; however, modified cut-offs are needed to optimize its performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From External Quality Assessment data, current harmonization of CRP measuring systems appears to be satisfactory, the inter-assay CV being well below 10%. The inter-method variability is even better (close to 3%) when the widely used measuring systems are compared at CRP concentrations employed as cut-off for detecting sub-clinical infection (i.e., 10.0 mg/L) and measurement variability estimated, according to ISO 20914:2019 Technical Specification, from the intermediate within-lab reproducibility of 6-month consecutive measurement data. According to the state-of-the-art model (which is better suited for CRP), the maximum allowable measurement uncertainty (MAU) for CRP measurement on clinical samples with 10.0 mg/L concentrations is 3.76% (desirable quality). As measurement uncertainty (MU) of the only available reference material (ERM-DA474/IFCC) is ∼3%, to fulfil desirable MAU on clinical samples, IVD manufacturers should work to keep the contribution of remaining MU sources (commercial calibrator and intermediate within-lab reproducibility) lower than 2.3%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

C-reactive protein (CRP) is a cytokine-mediated acute phase reactant with a recognized role in inflammatory conditions and infectious disease. In coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), elevated CRP concentrations in serum were frequently detected and significantly associated with poor outcome in terms of disease severity, need for intensive care, and in-hospital death. For these reasons, the marker was proposed as a powerful test for prognostic classification of COVID-19 patients. In most of available publications, there was however confounding information about how interpretative criteria for CRP in COVID-19 should be derived, including quality of employed assays and optimal cut-off definition. Assuring result harmonization and controlling measurement uncertainty in terms of performance specifications are fundamental to allow worldwide application of clinical information according to specific CRP thresholds and to avoid risk of patient misclassification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To be accurate and equivalent, laboratory results should be traceable to higher-order references. Furthermore, their quality should fulfill acceptable measurement uncertainty as defined to fit the intended clinical use. With this aim, in vitro diagnostics (IVD) manufacturers should define a calibration hierarchy to assign traceable values to their system calibrators and to fulfill during this process uncertainty limits for calibrators, which should represent a proportion of the uncertainty budget allowed for clinical laboratory results. It is therefore important that, on one hand, the laboratory profession clearly defines the clinically acceptable uncertainty for relevant tests and, on the other hand, end-users may know and verify how manufacturers have implemented the traceability of their calibrators and estimated the corresponding uncertainty. Important tools for IVD traceability surveillance are quality control programmes through the daily verification by clinical laboratories that control materials of analytical systems are in the manufacturer's declared validation range [Internal Quality Control (IQ C) component I] and the organization of External Quality Assessment Schemes meeting metrological criteria. In a separate way, clinical laboratories should also monitor the reliability of employed commercial systems through the IQC component II, devoted to estimation of the measurement uncertainty due to random effects, which includes analytical system imprecision together with individual laboratory performance in terms of variability.

This document discusses the measurement uncertainty (MU) of serum ferritin, a key performance indicator for laboratory measurements. The authors collected data from four commercial measuring systems and calculated the standard MU associated with clinical samples. The results showed that the Architect i2000 had the best performance in terms of MU on clinical samples. However, without an objectively defined analytical performance specification (APS), it is difficult to determine the suitability of this figure. The authors suggest using the 'state of the art-based' (SoA) APS model to temporarily define APS for MU. The data from this study can help provide information for defining APS for clinical sample measurements. The authors conclude that the practical application of the traceability concept and the procedural implementation of calibration traceability are often poorly managed, and comparative information like this study should be used to improve the analytical quality of measuring systems. [Extracted from the article]

Selecting appropriate laboratory tests based on available evidence is central to improve clinical effectiveness and impacting on patient outcome. Although long studied, there is no mutual agreement upon pleural fluid (PF) management in the laboratory context. Given the experienced confusion about the real contribution of laboratory investigations to guide clinical interpretation, in this update, we tried to identify useful tests for the PF analysis, aiming to unravel critical points and to define a common line in requesting modalities and practical management. We performed a careful literature review and a deepened study on available guidelines to finalize an evidence-based test selection, intended for clinicians' use to streamline PF management. The following tests depicted the basic PF profile routinely needed: (1) abbreviated Light's criteria (PF/serum total protein ratio and PF/serum lactate dehydrogenase ratio) and (2) cell count with differential analysis of haematological cells. This profile fulfils the primary goal to determine the PF nature and discriminate between exudative and transudative effusions. In specific circumstances, clinicians may consider additional tests as follows: the albumin serum to PF gradient, which reduces exudate misclassification rate by Light's criteria in patients with cardiac failure assuming diuretics; PF triglycerides, in differentiating chylothorax from pseudochylothorax; PF glucose, for identification of parapneumonic effusions and other causes of effusion, such as rheumatoid arthritis and malignancy; PF pH, in suspected infectious pleuritis and to give indications for pleural drainage; and PF adenosine deaminase, for a rapid detection of tuberculous effusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]