Gender Authorship in the Field of Clinical Chemistry.

BACKGROUND: Gender underrepresentation has long existed in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields. While there are upward trends in many areas of the life and health sciences, some disciplines are underrepresented in female author numbers, including first and corresponding authors. This study evaluated the participation by women as authors in the field of clinical chemistry. METHODS: Clinical Chemistry and The Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine were selected for data collection. Data were classified into four categories: total number of authors for each article, number of female authors for each article, whether the first author was female, and whether the corresponding author was female. From these data, the percentages of female authors, articles with female first authors, articles with female corresponding authors, and articles where a female was either first or corresponding author were calculated. RESULTS: Both journals had ≥40% total female authorship, ≥45% female first author, and 64% female first or corresponding author. The 40% female author number matched the percentage of female doctoral degree, board certified clinical chemists, and the 39% female PhDs and MDs in academic clinical pathology departments. Compared with a selected group of science or medicine journals and gender reports, Clinical Chemistry and The Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine exceeded most journals and gender reports in female total authorship, first author, and corresponding author. CONCLUSIONS: Women are well represented as authors in these two clinical chemistry journals. Both journals compare favorably against other scientific/medical journals. Female authorship in these two journals also parallels gender composition of the field of clinical chemistry.

Standardization of LC-MS for therapeutic drug monitoring of tacrolimus.

BACKGROUND: LC-MS is increasingly used for therapeutic drug monitoring of tacrolimus. A recent summary from an international proficiency-testing scheme demonstrated that the mass spectrometry respondents were the largest method group. However, these methods lack standardization, which may explain the relatively poor interlaboratory agreement for such methods. This study aimed to provide one path toward the standardization of tacrolimus quantification by use of LC-MS. METHODS: A 40-member whole blood tacrolimus proficiency panel was circulated to 7 laboratories, 4 in the US and 3 in Europe, offering routine LC-MS-based quantification of tacrolimus. All laboratories used a common LC-MS platform and followed the manufacturer's instructions that accompanied an LC-MS reagent kit intended for tacrolimus quantification in whole blood samples. Four patient pools were prepared that had sufficient volume to allow comparison with a tacrolimus reference measurement procedure. RESULTS: For the 40-member panel, the standardized MassTrak LC-MS assay demonstrated excellent agreement with a validated LC-MS method used by Analytical Services International (y = 1.02x - 0.02; r = 0.99). The CVs for the pooled patient samples ranged from 2.0% to 5.4%. The mean difference from the reference measurement procedure ranged from 0.4% to 4.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Tacrolimus assay standardization, which must include all facets of the analysis, is necessary to compare patient results between laboratories and to interpret consensus guidelines. LC-MS can provide accurate and precise measurement of tacrolimus between laboratories.