Search

ObjectivesThe objective of this prospective study was to investigate the role of adaptive immunity in response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.Design and methodsA cohort of 677 vaccinated individuals participated in a comprehensive survey of their vaccination status and associated side effects, and donated blood to evaluate their adaptive immune responses by neutralizing antibody (NAb) and T cell responses. The cohort then completed a follow-up survey to investigate the occurrence of breakthrough infections.ResultsNAb levels were the highest in participants vaccinated with Moderna, followed by Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson. NAb levels decreased with time after vaccination with Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson. T cell responses showed no significant difference among the different vaccines and remained stable up to 10 months after the study period for all vaccine types. In multivariate analyses, NAb responses (

ImportanceMost healthcare institutions require employees to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 and many also require at least one booster.ObjectiveWe determine the impact of vaccine type, demographics, and health conditions on COVID-19 vaccine side effects in healthcare professionals.DesignA COVID-19 immunity study was performed at the 2021 American Association for Clinical Chemistry Annual Scientific meeting. As part of this study, a REDCap survey with cascading questions was administered from September 9, 2021 to October 20, 2021. General questions included participant demographics, past and present health conditions, smoking, exercise, and medications. COVID-19 specific questions asked about SARS-CoV-2 vaccine status and type, vaccine-associated side effects after each dose including any boosters, previous infection with COVID-19, diagnostic testing performed, and type and severity symptoms of COVID-19.ResultsThere were 975 participants (47.1% male, median age of 50 years) who completed the survey. Pfizer was the most commonly administered vaccine (56.4%) followed by Moderna (32.0%) and Johnson & Johnson (7.1%). There were no significant differences in vaccine type received by age, health conditions, smoking, exercise, or type or number of prescription medications. Side effects were reported more frequently after second dose (e.g., Moderna or Pfizer) (54.1%) or single/only dose of Johnson & Johnson (47.8%). Males were significantly more likely to report no side effects (p < 0.001), while females were significantly more likely to report injection site reactions (p < 0.001), fatigue (p < 0.001), headache (p < 0.001), muscle pain (p < 0.001), chills (p = 0.001), fever (p = 0.007), and nausea (p < 0.001). There was a significant upward trend in participants reporting no side effects with increasing age (p < 0.001). There were no significant trends in side effects among different races, ethnicities, health conditions, medications, smoking status or exercise. In multivariate logistic regressions analyses, the second dose of Moderna was associated with a significantly higher risk of side effects than both the second dose of Pfizer and the single dose of Johnson & Johnson.Conclusions and relevanceYounger people, females, and those receiving the second dose of Moderna had more COVID-19 vaccine side effects that per self-report led to moderate to severe limitations. As reported in other studies, the increase in side effects from Moderna may be explained by higher viral mRNA concentrations but be associated with additional protective immunity.

CA 15-3 and CEA are tumor markers used in routine clinical care for breast cancer and colorectal cancer, among others. Current measurement procedures (MP) for these tumor markers are considered to be insufficiently harmonized. This study investigated the achievable harmonization for CA 15-3 and CEA by using an in silico simulation of external quality assessment (EQA) data from multiple EQA programs using patient-pool based samples. CA 15-3 and CEA data from SKML (2021), UK NEQAS (2020–2021) and KEQAS (2020–2021) were used. A harmonization protocol was defined in which MPs that were considered equivalent were used to value assign EQA samples, and recalibration was only required if the MP had a bias of >5 % with value assigned EQA. Harmonization status was assessed by determining the mean level of agreement and residual variation by CV (%). Only MPs from Abbott, Beckman, Roche and Siemens were available in all EQA programs. For CA 15-3, recalibration was proposed for Beckman MP only and for CEA, recalibration was proposed for Siemens MP only. When the harmonization procedures were applied, for CA 15-3 the pre-harmonization mean bias range per MP was reduced from −29.28 to 9.86 %, into −0.09–0.12 % after harmonization. For CEA, the mean bias range per MP was reduced from −23.78 to 2.00 % pre-harmonization to −3.13–1.42 % post-harmonization. The present study suggests that a significant improvement in the harmonization status of CA 15-3 and CEA may be achieved by recalibration of a limited number of MPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to assess the validity of external quality assessment (EQA) laboratory results across various cultural and environmental contexts and to identify potential improvement areas. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) Task Force on Global Laboratory Quality (TF-GLQ) conducted a 2-year study (2022 and 2023) in which EQA materials, related software and online training was provided by a commercial vendor to 100 laboratories in ten IFCC member society countries. The results were analysed on a monthly basis by the TF-GLQ, to show the number of submissions per country, tests per lab, acceptability rates, random failures and to get a measure of which analytes performed poorly. The EQA material was dispatched on a quarterly basis. Some countries had problems with customs releasing the material in a timely manner, resulting in laboratories not receiving them on time leading to no submission. We report here the results for the second year of the survey. The number of examinations varied between laboratories, ranging from seven to 84 analytes. Of the ten countries surveyed, six averaged greater than 90 % acceptable results over the whole 12-months cycle, one had unacceptable results for two of the nine months they returned results and the other four were considered to not perform to an acceptable standard. All 100 participating laboratories indicated satisfaction with the EQA survey and related services, including on-site training, and report handling. However, specimen receiving issues, suggest benefits in dispatching materials for a full 12-month cycle. Significant discrepancies in EQA performance indicate that four countries require long-term assistance, training and guidance. To ensure reliable patient results, promoting EQA in certain countries is essential to achieve the required level of quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cytokines are small proteins or glycoproteins that are secreted by a variety of immune and nonimmune cells. Cytokines are responsible for a variety of pleiotropic effects, including, but not limited [...], * Context.--The measurement of cytokines in clinical laboratories is becoming an increasingly routine part of immune monitoring when administering biologic and cell-based immunotherapies and also for clinical assessment of inflammatory conditions. While a number of commercial assays and platforms are available for cytokine measurement, there is currently little standardization among these analytical methods. Objective.--To characterize the variability and comparability among cytokine testing platforms that are commonly used in clinical laboratories. Design.--We analyzed data for 4 cytokines (interleukin [IL]-1, IL-6, IL-8, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha [TNF-[alpha]]) from 6 College of American Pathologists cytokine surveys administered from 2015 to 2018. Analyses interrogated variability between testing methods and variability within each laboratory across the mailings. Results.--Significant variability was noted across methods with analysis of IL-1 showing the least variability and IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-[alpha] varying between methods to a greater extent. Intralab variability was also significant with TNF-[alpha] measurements again showing the greatest variability. Conclusions.--This retrospective analysis of College of American Pathologists proficiency testing data for cytokine measurement is the largest method comparison to date, and this study provides a description of the variation of cytokine measurement across methods, across laboratories, and within laboratories. Serial monitoring of cytokines should preferentially be performed by the same method within the same laboratory.

In 2021, the Association for Diagnostics & Laboratory Medicine (ADLM) (formerly the American Association for Clinical Chemistry [AACC]) developed a scientific study that aimed to contribute to the understanding of SARS-CoV-2 immunity during the evolving course of the pandemic. This study was led by a group of expert member volunteers and resulted in survey data from 975 individuals and blood collection from 698 of those participants. This paper describes the formulation and execution of this large-scale scientific study, encompassing best practices and insights gained throughout the endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in US men, with an estimated 180 890 new cases expected in 2016. (1) This high incidence is largely due to [...], Context.--Prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) is a noncoding RNA that is highly overexpressed in prostate cancer (PCa) tissue and excreted in urine in patients with PCa. Objective.--To assess the clinical utility of urinary PCA3 in men at risk of PCa. Design.--We retrospectively reviewed a cohort of 271 men (median age, 63 years) with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and/or strong family history, and/or abnormal digital rectal examination findings. Diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+, LR-), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUC) were evaluated. Results.--PCA3 score was a significant predictor of prostate biopsy outcome (P < .001). A PCA3 score of 30 was the optimal cutoff for our study cohort, with a diagnostic sensitivity of 72.7%, specificity of 67.5%, PPV of 47.1%, NPV of 86.2%, LR+ of 2.24, LR- of 0.40, and DOR of 5.55. At this cutoff score, the PCA3 assay could avoid 57.4% of unnecessary invasive biopsies in the overall study cohort and 70.3% in the subgroup with PSA level in the "gray zone" (4-10 ng/mL). A logistic regression algorithm combining PCA3 with PSA increased the AUC from 0.571 for PSA-only to 0.729 (P < .001). The logistic combined marker gained the ability to discriminate low-grade from high-grade cancers. Conclusions.--Our data suggest that PCA3 improves the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of PSA and that the combination of PCA3 with PSA gives better overall performance in identification of PCa than serum PSA alone in the high-risk population. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2017-0185-0A

Monoclonal gammopathies are hematologic disorders characterized by abnormal production of one or more immunoglobulin clones. (1) They range from asymptomatic, benign disorders (such as monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance) to [...], Context.--Serum tests used for the screening and diagnosis of monoclonal gammopathies include serum protein electrophoresis (SPE; agarose gel or capillary zone), immunofixation (IFE) and immunosubtraction capillary electrophoresis, serum free light chains, quantitative immunoglobulins, and heavy/light-chain combinations. Urine protein electrophoresis and urine IFE may also be used to identify Bence-Jones proteinuria. Objective.--To assess current laboratory practice for monoclonal gammopathy testing. Design.--In April 2016, a voluntary questionnaire was distributed to 923 laboratories participating in a protein electrophoresis proficiency testing survey. Results.--Seven hundred seventy-four laboratories from 38 countries and regions completed the questionnaire (83.9% response rate; 774 of 923). The majority of participants (68.6%; 520 of 758) used agarose gel electrophoresis as their SPE method, whereas 31.4% (238 of 758) used capillary zone electrophoresis. The most common test approaches used in screening were SPE with reflex to IFE/immunosubtraction capillary electrophoresis (39.3%; 299 of 760); SPE only (19.1%; 145 of 760); SPE and IFE or immunosubtraction capillary electrophoresis (13.9%; 106 of 760); and SPE with IFE, serum free light chain, and quantitative immunoglobulins (11.8%; 90 of 760). Only 39.8% (305 of 767) of laboratories offered panel testing for ordering convenience. Although SPE was used by most laboratories in diagnosing new cases of myeloma, when laboratories reported the primary test used to follow patients with monoclonal gammopathy, only 55.7% (403 of 724) chose SPE, with the next most common selections being IFE (18.9%; 137 of 724), serum free light chain (11.7%; 85 of 724), and immunosubtraction capillary electrophoresis (2.1%; 15 of 724). Conclusions.--Ordering and testing practices for the screening and diagnosis of monoclonal gammopathy vary widely across laboratories. Improving utilization management and report content, as well as recognition and development of laboratory-directed testing guidelines, may serve to enhance the clinical value of testing. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2017-0128-CP