LBDNet interlaboratory comparison for the dicentric chromosome assay by digitized image analysis applying weighted robust statistical methods.

PURPOSE: This interlaboratory comparison was conducted to evaluate the performance of the Latin-American Biodosimetry Network (LBDNet) in analyzing digitized images for scoring dicentric chromosomes from in vitro irradiated blood samples. The exercise also assessed the use of weighted robust algorithms to compensate the uneven expertise among the participating laboratories. METHODS: Three sets of coded images obtained through the dicentric chromosome assay from blood samples irradiated at 1.5 Gy (sample A) and 4 Gy (sample B), as well as a non-irradiated whole blood sample (sample C), were shared among LBDNet laboratories. The images were captured using the Metafer4 platform coupled with the AutoCapt module. The laboratories were requested to perform triage scoring, conventional scoring, and dose estimation. The dose estimation was carried out using either their laboratory calibration curve or a common calibration curve. A comparative statistical analysis was conducted using a weighted robust Hampel algorithm and z score to compensate for uneven expertise in dicentric analysis and dose assessment among all laboratories. RESULTS: Out of twelve laboratories, one had unsatisfactory estimated doses at 0 Gy, and two had unsatisfactory estimated doses at 1.5 Gy when using their own calibration curve and triage scoring mode. However, all doses were satisfactory at 4 Gy. Six laboratories had estimated doses within 95% uncertainty limits at 0 Gy, seven at 1.5 Gy, and four at 4 Gy. While the mean dose for sample C was significantly biased using robust algorithms, applying weights to compensate for the laboratory's analysis expertise reduced the bias by half. The bias from delivered doses was only notable for sample C. Using the common calibration curve for dose estimation reduced the standard deviation (s*) estimated by robust methods for all three samples. CONCLUSIONS: The results underscore the significance of performing interlaboratory comparison exercises that involve digitized and electronically transmitted images, even when analyzing non-irradiated samples. In situations where the participating laboratories possess different levels of proficiency, it may prove essential to employ weighted robust algorithms to achieve precise outcomes.

Intra- and inter-laboratory variation in the scoring of micronuclei and nucleoplasmic bridges in binucleated human lymphocytes. Results of an international slide-scoring exercise by the HUMN project.

One of the objectives of the HUman MicroNucleus (HUMN) project is to identify the methodological variables that have an important impact on micronucleus (MN) or micronucleated (MNed) cell frequencies measured in human lymphocytes using the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay. In a previous study we had shown that the scoring criteria used were likely to be an important variable. To determine the extent of residual variation when laboratories scored cells from the same cultures using the same set of standard scoring criteria, an inter-laboratory slide-scoring exercise was performed among 34 laboratories from 21 countries with a total of 51 slide scorers involved. The results of this study show that even under these optimized conditions there is a great variation in the MN frequency or MNed cell frequency obtained by individual laboratories and scorers. All laboratories ranked correctly the MNed cell frequency in cells from cultures that were unirradiated, or exposed to 1 or 2Gy of gamma rays. The study also estimated that the intra-scorer median coefficient of variation for duplicate MNed cell frequency scores is 29% for unexposed cultures and 14 and 11% for cells exposed to 1 and 2Gy, respectively. These values can be used as a standard for quality or acceptability of data in future studies. Using a Poisson regression model it was estimated that radiation dose explained 67% of the variance, while staining method, cell sample, laboratory, and covariance explained 0.6, 0.3, 6.5, and 25.6% of the variance, respectively, leaving only 3.1% of the variance unexplained. As part of this exercise, nucleoplasmic bridges were also estimated by the laboratories; however, inexperience in the use of this biomarker of chromosome rearrangement was reflected in the much greater heterogeneity in the data and the unexplained variation estimated by the Poisson model. The results of these studies indicate clearly that even after standardizing culture and scoring conditions it will be necessary to calibrate scorers and laboratories if MN, MNed cell and nucleoplasmic bridge frequencies are to be reliably compared among laboratories and among populations.