RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Urine albumin (UA) is an important biomarker of chronic kidney disease. Current in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVD-MDs) for measuring UA are not standardized, and median results among IVD-MDs differ by approximately 45%. Since fixed decision values are used to interpret UA, higher-order reference measurement procedures (RMPs) are needed for metrological traceability. Three candidate liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry RMPs have been developed for UA. METHODS: Eight single-donation human urine samples were measured by 3 candidate RMPs. Results were compared using t-test and variance component analysis. RESULTS: The mean results for each urine sample from each RMP laboratory were not statistically different from the overall mean value by t-test. The median total CV including contributions from bias and imprecision among the 3 RMP laboratories was 6.23% using variance component analysis for each sample. The allowable bias to the RMP for an end-user IVD-MD was â¦9.0% or â¦3.0% based on the desirable or optimal total allowable error of 30% or 24%, respectively. A maximum allowable standard uncertainty for an RMP result was determined to be 4.3% or 3.3% for desirable or optimal performance, respectively. The standard uncertainties for all of the RMP laboratories meet the desirable and optimal standard uncertainty specifications. CONCLUSION: The candidate RMPs for UA in these 3 laboratories have suitable agreement of results and uncertainties for use as higher-order RMPs in the metrological traceability of end-user IVD-MDs for measuring UA.
RESUMEN
Equivalent results for the same measurand in clinical samples (CSs), measured using different end-user in-vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVD-MDs), are essential for the application of clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, monitoring, or risk assessment. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) document 17511:2020 specifies how to establish metrological traceability to the highest available reference system component to enable equivalent results among IVD-MDs. Commutability with CSs is an essential property of a reference material used as a calibrator in a calibration hierarchy. However, not all calibrators in a calibration hierarchy are required to be commutable; different calibration hierarchies have different requirements for which calibrators must be commutable with CSs. Because assessment of commutability is a substantial effort, it is therefore important to determine which calibrators need to be commutable when implementing a calibration hierarchy. We provide guidance on which calibrators must be commutable with CSs, when a correction for any noncommutability bias is appropriate, and when commutability of a calibrator with CSs is not required for various types of calibration hierarchies described in ISO 17511:2020.
Asunto(s)
Calibración , Humanos , Estándares de ReferenciaRESUMEN
A secondary higher-order calibrator is required to be commutable with clinical samples to be suitable for use in the calibration hierarchy of an end-user clinical laboratory in vitro diagnostic medical device (IVD-MD). Commutability is a property of a reference material that means results for a reference material and for clinical samples have the same numeric relationship, within specified limits, across the measurement procedures for which the reference material is intended to be used. Procedures for assessing commutability have been described in the literature. This report provides recommendations for establishing a quantitative criterion to assess the commutability of a certified reference material (CRM). The criterion is the maximum allowable noncommutability bias (MANCB) that allows a CRM to be used as a calibrator in a calibration hierarchy for an IVD-MD without exceeding the maximum allowable combined standard uncertainty for a clinical sample result (umaxCS). Consequently, the MANCB is derived as a fraction of the umaxCS for the measurand. The suitability of an MANCB for practical use in a commutability assessment is determined by estimating the number of measurements of clinical samples and CRMs required based on the precision performance and nonselectivity for the measurand of the measurement procedures in the assessment. Guidance is also provided for evaluating indeterminate commutability conclusions and how to report results of a commutability assessment.
RESUMEN
The Joint Committee for Traceability in Laboratory Medicine (JCTLM) currently lists the secondary commutable certified reference material (CRM) ERM DA-474/IFCC (DA-474) "C-Reactive Protein in Human Serum" and two generic immunoassay-based method principles as the basis for implementing the metrological traceability of C-reactive protein (CRP) measurements by end-user measurement procedures used by medical laboratories. The current metrological traceability has produced well harmonized results for clinical samples among different end-user measurement procedures. New higher-order pure substance and secondary commutable CRMs have been nominated for listing by the JCTLM. However, the data supporting performance of these new candidate CRMs, including use of new mass spectrometry based candidate reference measurement procedures (RMPs), was not clear regarding the influence that introducing these new CRMs would have on the current well harmonized results achieved with the existing metrological traceability to DA-474. The clinically relevant CRP measurand in blood serum or plasma is a pentamer of identical subunits, which adds complexity to the application of higher-order CRMs and RMPs. The JCTLM convened a workshop in December 2022 to review the appropriate implementation of metrological traceability of CRP measurements. The workshop consensus was that the extent-of-equivalence data must include considerations about the impact of a new CRM when used for its intended purpose in the calibration hierarchies of existing end-user measuring systems; and that a new RMP must compare results with another existing well validated candidate RMP or with a globally available end-user measurement system.
Asunto(s)
Proteína C-Reactiva , Laboratorios , Humanos , Estándares de Referencia , Consenso , CalibraciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Standardized results for laboratory tests are particularly important when their interpretation depends on fixed medical practice guidelines or common reference intervals. The medical laboratory community has developed a roadmap for an infrastructure to achieve standardized test results described in the International Organization for Standardization standard 17511:2020 In vitro diagnostic medical devices - Requirements for establishing metrological traceability of values assigned to calibrators, trueness control materials and human samples. Among the challenges to implementing metrological traceability are the availability of fit-for-purpose matrix-based certified reference materials (CRMs) and requirements for regulatory review that differ among countries. A workshop in December 2021 focused on these two challenges and developed recommendations for improved practices. DISCUSSION: The participants agreed that prioritization of measurands for standardization should be based on their impact on medical decisions in a clinical pathway. Ensuring that matrix-based CRMs are globally available for more measurands will enable fit-for-purpose calibration hierarchies for more laboratory tests. Regulation of laboratory tests is important to ensure safety and effectiveness for the populations served. Because regulations are country or region specific, manufacturers must submit recalibration changes intended to standardize results for regulatory review to all areas in which a measuring system is marketed. RECOMMENDATIONS: A standardization initiative requires collaboration and planning among all interested stakeholders. Global collaboration should be further developed for prioritization of measurands for standardization, and for coordinating the production and supply of CRMs worldwide. More uniform regulatory submission requirements are desirable when recalibration is implemented to achieve internationally standardized results.
Asunto(s)
Juego de Reactivos para Diagnóstico , Humanos , Estándares de Referencia , Valores de Referencia , CalibraciónRESUMEN
Recognizing that race is a social and not a biological construct, healthcare professionals and the public have called for removal of race in clinical algorithms. In response, the National Kidney Foundation and the American Society of Nephrology created the Task Force on Reassessing the Inclusion of Race in Diagnosing Kidney Diseases to examine the issue and provide recommendations. The final report from the Task Force recommends calculating estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) without a race coefficient using the recently published CKD-EPI 2021 creatinine (cr) and creatinine-cystatin C (cr-cys) equations. The Task Force recommends immediately replacing older eGFRcr equations (MDRD Study and CKD-EPI 2009) with the new CKD-EPI 2021 equation. In a 2019 survey by the College of American Pathologists, 23% of 6200 laboratories reporting eGFRcr used an incorrect equation that is not suitable for use with standardized creatinine measurements, 34% used the CKD-EPI 2009 equation and 43% used the MDRD Study 2006 equation re-expressed for standardized creatinine measurement. Rapid transition to using the CKD-EPI 2021 equation is an opportunity for laboratories to standardize to a single equation to eliminate differences in eGFRcr due to different equations used by different laboratories, and to report eGFR without use of race. We provide guidance to laboratories for implementing the CKD-EPI 2021 equations for both eGFRcr and eGFRcr-cys.
Asunto(s)
Laboratorios , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica , Creatinina , Tasa de Filtración Glomerular/fisiología , Humanos , Riñón , Laboratorios Clínicos , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/diagnósticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In response to a national call for re-evaluation of the use of race in clinical algorithms, the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) and the American Society of Nephrology (ASN) established a Task Force to reassess inclusion of race in the estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in the United States and its implications for diagnosis and management of patients with, or at risk for, kidney diseases. PROCESS & DELIBERATIONS: The Task Force organized its activities over 10 months in phases to (1) clarify the problem and evidence regarding GFR estimating equations in the United States (described previously in an interim report), and, in this final report, (2) evaluate approaches to address use of race in GFR estimation, and (3) provide recommendations. We identified 26 approaches for the estimation of GFR that did or did not consider race and narrowed our focus, by consensus, to 5 of those approaches. We holistically evaluated each approach considering 6 attributes: assay availability and standardization; implementation; population diversity in equation development; performance compared with measured GFR; consequences to clinical care, population tracking, and research; and patient centeredness. To arrive at a unifying approach to estimate GFR, we integrated information and evidence from many sources in assessing strengths and weaknesses in attributes for each approach, recognizing the number of Black and non-Black adults affected. RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) For US adults (>85% of whom have normal kidney function), we recommend immediate implementation of the CKD-EPI creatinine equation refit without the race variable in all laboratories in the United States because it does not include race in the calculation and reporting, included diversity in its development, is immediately available to all laboratories in the United States, and has acceptable performance characteristics and potential consequences that do not disproportionately affect any one group of individuals. (2) We recommend national efforts to facilitate increased, routine, and timely use of cystatin C, especially to confirm estimated GFR in adults who are at risk for or have chronic kidney disease, because combining filtration markers (creatinine and cystatin C) is more accurate and would support better clinical decisions than either marker alone. If ongoing evidence supports acceptable performance, the CKD-EPI eGFR-cystatin C (eGFRcys) and eGFR creatinine-cystatin C (eGFRcr-cys_R) refit without the race variables should be adopted to provide another first-line test, in addition to confirmatory testing. (3) Research on GFR estimation with new endogenous filtration markers and on interventions to eliminate race and ethnic disparities should be encouraged and funded. An investment in science is needed for newer approaches that generate accurate, unbiased, and precise GFR measurement and estimation without the inclusion of race, and that promote health equity and do not generate disparate care. IMPLEMENTATION: This unified approach, without specification of race, should be adopted across the United States. High-priority and multistakeholder efforts should implement this solution.
Asunto(s)
Nefrología , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica , Adulto , Creatinina , Tasa de Filtración Glomerular , Promoción de la Salud , Humanos , Riñón , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/epidemiología , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
For almost two decades, equations that use serum creatinine, age, sex, and race to eGFR have included "race" as Black or non-Black. Given considerable evidence of disparities in health and healthcare delivery in African American communities, some regard keeping a race term in GFR equations as a practice that differentially influences access to care and kidney transplantation. Others assert that race captures important non GFR determinants of serum creatinine and its removal from the calculation may perpetuate other disparities. The National Kidney Foundation (NKF) and American Society of Nephrology (ASN) established a task force in 2020 to reassess the inclusion of race in the estimation of GFR in the United States and its implications for diagnosis and subsequent management of patients with, or at risk for, kidney diseases. This interim report details the process, initial assessment of evidence, and values defined regarding the use of race to estimate GFR. We organized activities in phases: (1) clarify the problem and examine evidence, (2) evaluate different approaches to address use of race in GFR estimation, and (3) make recommendations. In phase one, we constructed statements about the evidence and defined values regarding equity and disparities; race and racism; GFR measurement, estimation, and equation performance; laboratory standardization; and patient perspectives. We also identified several approaches to estimate GFR and a set of attributes to evaluate these approaches. Building on evidence and values, the attributes of alternative approaches to estimate GFR will be evaluated in the next phases and recommendations will be made.
Asunto(s)
Comités Consultivos , Tasa de Filtración Glomerular , Enfermedades Renales/diagnóstico , Enfermedades Renales/etnología , Factores Raciales , Agencias Voluntarias de Salud , Comités Consultivos/organización & administración , Disparidades en el Estado de Salud , Disparidades en Atención de Salud , Humanos , Enfermedades Renales/fisiopatología , Conceptos Matemáticos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In response to a national call for re-evaluation of the use of race in clinical algorithms, the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) and the American Society of Nephrology (ASN) established a Task Force to reassess inclusion of race in the estimation of GFR in the United States and its implications for diagnosis and management of patients with, or at risk for, kidney diseases. PROCESS DELIBERATIONS: The Task Force organized its activities over 10 months in phases to ( 1 ) clarify the problem and evidence regarding eGFR equations in the United States (described previously in an interim report), and, in this final report, ( 2 ) evaluate approaches to address use of race in GFR estimation, and ( 3 ) provide recommendations. We identified 26 approaches for the estimation of GFR that did or did not consider race and narrowed our focus, by consensus, to five of those approaches. We holistically evaluated each approach considering six attributes: assay availability and standardization; implementation; population diversity in equation development; performance compared with measured GFR; consequences to clinical care, population tracking, and research; and patient centeredness. To arrive at a unifying approach to estimate GFR, we integrated information and evidence from many sources in assessing strengths and weaknesses in attributes for each approach, recognizing the number of Black and non-Black adults affected. RECOMMENDATIONS: ( 1 ) For US adults (>85% of whom have normal kidney function), we recommend immediate implementation of the CKD-EPI creatinine equation refit without the race variable in all laboratories in the United States because it does not include race in the calculation and reporting, included diversity in its development, is immediately available to all laboratories in the United States, and has acceptable performance characteristics and potential consequences that do not disproportionately affect any one group of individuals. ( 2 ) We recommend national efforts to facilitate increased, routine, and timely use of cystatin C, especially to confirm eGFR in adults who are at risk for or have CKD, because combining filtration markers (creatinine and cystatin C) is more accurate and would support better clinical decisions than either marker alone. If ongoing evidence supports acceptable performance, the CKD-EPI eGFR-cystatin C (eGFRcys) and eGFR creatinine-cystatin C (eGFRcr-cys_R) refit without the race variables should be adopted to provide another first-line test, in addition to confirmatory testing. ( 3 ) Research on GFR estimation with new endogenous filtration markers and on interventions to eliminate race and ethnic disparities should be encouraged and funded. An investment in science is needed for newer approaches that generate accurate, unbiased, and precise GFR measurement and estimation without the inclusion of race, and that promote health equity and do not generate disparate care. IMPLEMENTATION: This unified approach, without specification of race, should be adopted across the United States. High-priority and multistakeholder efforts should implement this solution.
Asunto(s)
Nefrología , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Cistatina C , Tasa de Filtración Glomerular/fisiología , Creatinina , Promoción de la Salud , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/fisiopatología , Riñón/fisiopatologíaRESUMEN
The Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes 2012 Clinical Practice Guideline on Chronic Kidney Disease (1) recommends calculating estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) using equations developed by the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) for adults ≥18 years (2) and by the Chronic Kidney Disease in Children (CKiD) for ages <18 years (3). These equations were recommended because they used readily available information, serum/plasma/blood creatinine, plus age, sex, and race for adults, and height for children; and have been validated in large and diverse cohorts of people who had measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) as a basis for establishing accuracy.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Renal Crónica , Adulto , Niño , Preescolar , Creatinina/química , Tasa de Filtración Glomerular/fisiología , Humanos , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/diagnósticoRESUMEN
For almost 2 decades, equations that use serum creatinine, age, sex, and race to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR) have included "race" as Black or non-Black. Given considerable evidence of disparities in health and health care delivery in African American communities, some regard keeping a race term in GFR equations as a practice that differentially influences access to care and kidney transplantation. Others assert that race captures important non-GFR determinants of serum creatinine and its removal from the calculation may perpetuate other disparities. The National Kidney Foundation (NKF) and American Society of Nephrology (ASN) established a task force in 2020 to reassess the inclusion of race in the estimation of GFR in the United States and its implications for diagnosis and subsequent management of patients with, or at risk for, kidney diseases. This interim report details the process, initial assessment of evidence, and values defined regarding the use of race to estimate GFR. We organized activities in phases: (1) clarify the problem and examine evidence, (2) evaluate different approaches to address use of race in GFR estimation, and (3) make recommendations. In phase 1, we constructed statements about the evidence and defined values regarding equity and disparities; race and racism; GFR measurement, estimation, and equation performance; laboratory standardization; and patient perspectives. We also identified several approaches to estimate GFR and a set of attributes to evaluate these approaches. Building on evidence and values, the attributes of alternative approaches to estimate GFR will be evaluated in the next phases and recommendations will be made.
Asunto(s)
Tasa de Filtración Glomerular , Grupos Raciales , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/diagnóstico , Negro o Afroamericano , Disparidades en el Estado de Salud , Disparidades en Atención de Salud , Humanos , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/terapia , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Establishing metrological traceability to an assigned value of a matrix-based certified reference material (CRM) that has been validated to be commutable among available end-user measurement procedures (MPs) is central to producing equivalent results for the measurand in clinical samples (CSs) irrespective of the clinical laboratory MPs used. When a CRM is not commutable with CSs, the bias due to noncommutability will be propagated to the CS results causing incorrect metrological traceability to the CRM and nonequivalent CS results among different MPs. In a commutability assessment, a conclusion that a CRM is commutable or noncommutable for use with a specific MP is made when the difference in bias between the CRM and CSs meets or does not meet a criterion for that specific MP when compared to other MPs. A conclusion regarding commutability or noncommutability requires that the magnitude of the difference in bias observed in the commutability assessment remains unchanged over time. This conclusion requires the CRM to be stable and no substantive changes in the MPs. These conditions should be periodically reverified. If an available CRM is determined to be noncommutable for a specific MP, that CRM can be used in the calibration hierarchy for that MP when an appropriately validated MP-specific correction for the noncommutability bias is included. We describe with examples how a MP-specific correction and its uncertainty can be developed and applied in a calibration hierarchy to achieve metrological traceability of results for CSs to the CRM's assigned value.
Asunto(s)
Sesgo , Guías como Asunto , Juego de Reactivos para Diagnóstico/normas , Calibración , Humanos , Estándares de ReferenciaRESUMEN
Background Clinical laboratories use internal quality control (QC) data to calculate standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation (CV) to estimate uncertainty of results and to interpret QC results. We examined the influence of different instruments, and QC and reagent lots on the CV calculated from QC data. Methods Results for BioRad Multiqual frozen liquid QC samples over a 2-year interval were partitioned by QC and reagent lots. The mean and CV were calculated for each partition for each of three Abbott Architect c8000 instruments for measuring serum alanine amino transferase (ALT), creatinine (enzymatic), glucose and sodium. Results CVs differed among partitions and instruments for two QC levels by 5.8- and 3.3-fold for ALT, by 4.7- and 2.1-fold for creatinine, by 2.0- and 2.6-fold for glucose, and by 2.1- and 2.0-fold for sodium. Pooled CVs for two QC levels varied among instruments by 1.78- and 1.11-fold for ALT, by 1.63- and 1.11-fold for creatinine, by 1.08- and 1.06-fold for glucose, and by 1.24- and 1.31-fold for sodium. Conclusions The CVs from QC data varied substantially among QC and reagent lots and for different identical specification instruments. The CV used to estimate uncertainty for a measurement result or as the basis for interpreting individual QC results must be derived over a sufficient time interval to obtain a pooled CV that represents "typical" performance of a measuring system. An estimate of uncertainty provided to users of laboratory results will itself have uncertainty that can influence medical decisions.
Asunto(s)
Técnicas de Laboratorio Clínico/estadística & datos numéricos , Indicadores y Reactivos/química , Alanina Transaminasa/sangre , Creatinina/análisis , Glucosa/análisis , Humanos , Control de Calidad , Sodio/análisis , Factores de Tiempo , IncertidumbreRESUMEN
Manufacturers of in vitro diagnostic medical devices, clinical laboratories, research laboratories and calibration laboratories require commutable reference materials that can be used in the calibration hierarchies of medical laboratory measurement procedures used for human specimens to establish metrological traceability to higher order reference systems. Commutable materials are also useful in external quality assessment surveys. In order to achieve these goals, matrix-based reference materials with long-term stability, appropriate measurand concentrations and commutability with individual human specimens are required. The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guideline C37-A (now archived) provided guidance to prepare commutable pooled serum reference materials for use in the calibration hierarchies of cholesterol measurement procedures. Experience using the C37-A guideline has identified a number of technical enhancements as well as applications to measurands other than cholesterol. This experience is incorporated into this updated protocol to ensure the procedure will continue to meet the needs of the medical laboratory. The updated protocol describes a procedure for preparing frozen human serum units or pools with minimal matrix alterations that are likely to be commutable with individual human serum samples. The protocol provides step-by-step guidance for the planning phase, collection of individual serum units, processing the units, qualifying the units for use in a pool and frozen storage of aliquots of pooled sera to manufacture frozen serum pools. Guidance on how to perform quality control of the final product and suggestions on documentation are also provided.
Asunto(s)
Análisis Químico de la Sangre/normas , Recolección de Muestras de Sangre/métodos , Documentación , Suero/química , Humanos , Valores de ReferenciaRESUMEN
Objectives: External quality assessment (EQA) with commutable samples is used for assessing agreement of results for patients' samples. We investigated the feasibility to aggregate results from four different EQA schemes to determine the bias between different measurement procedures and a reference target value. Methods: We aggregated EQA results for creatinine from programs that used commutable EQA material by calculating the relative difference between individual participant results and the reference target value for each sample. The means and standard errors of the means were calculated for the relative differences. Results were partitioned by methods, manufacturers and instrument platforms to evaluate the biases for the measurement procedures. Results: Data aggregated for enzymatic methods had biases that varied from -8.2 to 3.8% among seven instrument platforms for creatinine at normal concentrations (61-85 µmol/L). EQA schemes differed in the evidence provided about the commutability of their samples, and in the amount of detail collected from participants regarding the measurement procedures which limited the ability to sub-divide aggregated data by instrument platforms and models. Conclusions: EQA data could be aggregated from four different programs using different commutable samples to determine bias among different measurement procedures. Criteria for commutability for EQA samples as well as standardization of reporting the measurement methods, reagents, instrument platforms and models used by participants are needed to improve the ability to aggregate the results for optimal assessment of performance of measurement procedures. Aggregating data from a larger number of EQA schemes is feasible to assess trueness on a global scale.
Asunto(s)
Análisis Químico de la Sangre/normas , Creatinina/sangre , Análisis Químico de la Sangre/estadística & datos numéricos , Agregación de Datos , Estudios de Factibilidad , Humanos , Países Bajos , Noruega , Control de Calidad , Reino Unido , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Commutability is a property of a reference material (RM) that relates to the closeness of agreement between results for an RM and results for clinical samples (CSs) when measured by ≥2 measurement procedures (MPs). Commutability of RMs used in a calibration traceability scheme is an essential property for them to be fit for purpose. Similarly, commutability of trueness controls or external quality assessment samples is essential when those materials are used to assess trueness of results for CSs. This report is part 1 of a 3-part series describing how to assess commutability of RMs. Part 1 defines commutability and addresses critical components of the experimental design for commutability assessment, including selection of individual CSs, use of pooled CSs, qualification of MPs for inclusion, establishing criteria for the determination that an RM is commutable, generalization of commutability conclusions to future measurements made with the MPs included in the assessment, and information regarding commutability to be included in the certificate for an RM. Parts 2 and 3 in the series present 2 different statistical approaches to commutability assessment that use fixed criteria related to the medical decisions that will be made using the laboratory test results.
Asunto(s)
Técnicas de Laboratorio Clínico/normas , Calibración , Humanos , Estándares de ReferenciaRESUMEN
A process is described to assess the commutability of a reference material (RM) intended for use as a calibrator based on its ability to fulfill its intended use in a calibration traceability scheme to produce equivalent clinical sample (CS) results among different measurement procedures (MPs) for the same measurand. Three sources of systematic error are elucidated in the context of creating the calibration model for translating MP signals to measurand amounts: calibration fit, calibrator level trueness, and commutability. An example set of 40 CS results from 7 MPs is used to illustrate estimation of bias and variability for each MP. The candidate RM is then used to recalibrate each MP, and its effectiveness in reducing the systematic error among the MPs within an acceptable level of equivalence based on medical requirements confirms its commutability for those MPs. The RM is declared noncommutable for MPs for which, after recalibration, the CS results do not agree with those from other MPs. When a lack of agreement is found, other potential causes, including lack of calibration fit, should be investigated before concluding the RM is noncommutable. The RM is considered fit for purpose for those MPs where commutability is demonstrated.
Asunto(s)
Técnicas de Laboratorio Clínico/normas , Estándares de Referencia , Sesgo , Calibración , HumanosRESUMEN
A process is described to assess the commutability of a reference material (RM) intended for use as a calibrator, trueness control, or external quality assessment sample based on the difference in bias between an RM and clinical samples (CSs) measured using 2 different measurement procedures (MPs). This difference in bias is compared with a criterion based on a medically relevant difference between an RM and CS results to make a conclusion regarding commutability. When more than 2 MPs are included, the commutability is assessed pairwise for all combinations of 2 MPs. This approach allows the same criterion to be used for all combinations of MPs included in the assessment. The assessment is based on an error model that allows estimation of various random and systematic sources of error, including those from sample-specific effects of interfering substances. An advantage of this approach is that the difference in bias between an RM and the average bias of CSs at the concentration (i.e., amount of substance present or quantity value) of the RM is determined and its uncertainty estimated. An RM is considered fit for purpose for those MPs for which commutability is demonstrated.
Asunto(s)
Técnicas de Laboratorio Clínico/normas , Sesgo , Técnicas de Laboratorio Clínico/estadística & datos numéricos , Interpretación Estadística de Datos , Humanos , Estándares de Referencia , Manejo de Especímenes/normas , IncertidumbreRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Measurements of serum and plasma albumin are widely used in medicine, including as indicators of quality of patient care in renal dialysis centers. METHODS: Pools were prepared from residual patient serum (n = 50) and heparin plasma (n = 48) from patients without renal disease, and serum from patients with kidney failure before hemodialysis (n = 53). Albumin was measured in all samples and in ERM-DA470k/IFCC reference material (RM) by 3 immunochemical, 9 bromcresol green (BCG), and 12 bromcresol purple (BCP) methods. RESULTS: Two of 3 immunochemical procedures, 5 of 9 BCG, and 10 of 12 BCP methods recovered the RM value within its uncertainty. One immunochemical and 3 BCG methods were biased vs the RM value. Random error components were small for all measurement procedures. The Tina-quant immunochemical method was chosen as the reference measurement procedure based on recovery and results of error analyses. Mean biases for BCG vs Tina-quant were 1.5% to 13.9% and were larger at lower albumin concentrations. BCP methods' mean biases were -5.4% to 1.2% irrespective of albumin concentration. Biases for plasma samples were generally higher than for serum samples for all method types. For most measurement procedures, biases were lower for serum from patients on hemodialysis vs patients without kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences among immunochemical, BCG, and BCP methods compromise interpretation of serum albumin results. Guidelines and calculations for clinical management of kidney and other diseases must consider the method used for albumin measurement until harmonization can be achieved.