Baseline Assessment of 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Reference Material and Proficiency Testing/External Quality Assurance Material Commutability: A Vitamin D Standardization Program Study.

The Vitamin D Standardization Program (VDSP) coordinated a study in 2012 to assess the commutability of reference materials and proficiency testing/external quality assurance materials for total 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] in human serum, the primary indicator of vitamin D status. A set of 50 single-donor serum samples as well as 17 reference and proficiency testing/external quality assessment materials were analyzed by participating laboratories that used either immunoassay or LC-MS methods for total 25(OH)D. The commutability test materials included National Institute of Standards and Technology Standard Reference Material 972a Vitamin D Metabolites in Human Serum as well as materials from the College of American Pathologists and the Vitamin D External Quality Assessment Scheme. Study protocols and data analysis procedures were in accordance with Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. The majority of the test materials were found to be commutable with the methods used in this commutability study. These results provide guidance for laboratories needing to choose appropriate reference materials and select proficiency or external quality assessment programs and will serve as a foundation for additional VDSP studies.

Baseline Assessment of 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Assay Performance: A Vitamin D Standardization Program (VDSP) Interlaboratory Comparison Study.

The Vitamin D Standardization Program (VDSP) coordinated an interlaboratory study to assess the comparability of measurements of total 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] in human serum, which is the primary marker of vitamin D status. A set of 50 individual donor samples were analyzed by 15 different laboratories representing national nutrition surveys, assay manufacturers, and clinical and/or research laboratories to provide results for total 25(OH)D using both immunoassays (IAs) and LC tandem MS (MS/MS). The results were evaluated relative to bias compared with the target values assigned based on a combination of measurements at Ghent University (Belgium) and the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology using reference measurement procedures for the determination of 25(OH)D2 and 25(OH)D3. CV and mean bias for each laboratory and assay platform were assessed and compared with previously established VDSP performance criteria, namely CV ≤ 10% and mean bias ≤ 5%. Nearly all LC-MS/MS results achieved VDSP criteria, whereas only 50% of IAs met the criterion for a ≤10% CV and only three of eight IAs achieved the ≤5% bias. These results establish a benchmark for the evaluation of 25(OH)D assay performance and standardization activities in the future.

Consensus Statement for the Management and Communication of High Risk Laboratory Results.

Ineffective test follow-up is a major source of harm for patients around the world. Unreliable communication from medical laboratories (henceforth termed 'laboratories') to clinicians of results that represent critical or significant risk to patients (collectively termed 'high risk results') is a contributing factor to this problem. Throughout Australasia, management practices for such results vary considerably. The recommendations presented in this document are based on best practice derived from the published literature and follow consultation with a wide range of stakeholders. These recommendations were created to harmonise Australasian practices by guiding laboratories in the design and implementation of safe and effective communication procedures for managing high risk results which require timely notification.

Recommendations for standardized reporting of protein electrophoresis in Australia and New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Although protein electrophoresis of serum (SPEP) and urine (UPEP) specimens is a well-established laboratory technique, the reporting of results using this important method varies considerably between laboratories. The Australasian Association of Clinical Biochemists recognized a need to adopt a standardized approach to reporting SPEP and UPEP by clinical laboratories. METHODS: A Working Party considered available data including published literature and clinical studies, together with expert opinion in order to establish optimal reporting practices. A position paper was produced, which was subsequently revised through a consensus process involving scientists and pathologists with expertise in the field throughout Australia and New Zealand. RESULTS: Recommendations for standardized reporting of protein electrophoresis have been produced. These cover analytical requirements: detection systems; serum protein and albumin quantification; fractionation into alpha-1, alpha-2, beta and gamma fractions; paraprotein quantification; urine Bence Jones protein quantification; paraprotein characterization; and laboratory performance, expertise and staffing. The recommendations also include general interpretive commenting and commenting for specimens with paraproteins and small bands together with illustrative examples of reports. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations are provided for standardized reporting of protein electrophoresis in Australia and New Zealand. It is expected that such standardized reporting formats will reduce both variation between laboratories and the risk of misinterpretation of results.

Recommendations for lipid testing and reporting by Australian pathology laboratories.

The importance of measuring blood lipids in determining the absolute risk of a cardiovascular event is now well established. In Australia, the National Heart Foundation of Australia and the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand (NHFA/CSANZ) have done much to educate doctors. In recent years the recommendations of the NHFA/CSANZ have been based on values for Low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C) as well as High-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and Triglyceride (TG). This change has been reflected in requests to pathology laboratories. However the interpretation of these results may be difficult and the NHFA guidelines outline desirable values for patients at high risk only. There are no formal recommendations for reference intervals or interpretive comments. With the availability of expert systems, some pathology laboratories are now in a better position to provide specific comments to assist with the interpretation of test results. An ad hoc committee of private and public chemical pathologists met to draft recommendations for lipid testing and reporting by Australian pathology providers, on the basis of current guidelines and their own expertise. Provisions in the current Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) for lipid testing were reviewed, and the indications for lipid testing, recommended tests, the logistics of managing specimens, methods of analysis and availability of specialised tests have been documented. Recommendations are made on the provision of desirable values for lipid tests. Suggestions are provided on interpretive comments which could accompany reports of lipid test results, including categorisation of the likely associated lipoprotein abnormalities, their causes, contribution to risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and targets for treatment. Current and future approaches to the assessment of risk for CVD are discussed.