A guide to conducting systematic reviews of clinical laboratory tests.

Clinical laboratory professionals have an instrumental role in supporting clinical decision making with the optimal use of laboratory testing for screening, risk stratification, diagnostic, prognostic, treatment selection and monitoring of different states of health and disease. Delivering evidence-based laboratory medicine relies on review of available data and literature. The information derived, supports many national policies to improve patient care through clinical practice guidelines or best practice recommendations. The quality, validity and bias of this literature is variable. Hence, there is a need to collate similar studies and data and analyse them critically. Systematic review, thus, becomes the most important source of evidence. A systematic review, unlike a scoping or narrative review, involves a thorough understanding of the procedure involved and a stepwise methodology. There are nuances that need some consideration for laboratory medicine systematic reviews. The purpose of this article is to describe the process of performing a systematic review in the field of laboratory medicine, describing the available methodologies, tools and software packages that can be used to facilitate this process.

Lipid distributions in the Global Diagnostics Network across five continents.

AIMS: Lipids are central in the development of cardiovascular disease, and the present study aimed to characterize variation in lipid profiles across different countries to improve understanding of cardiovascular risk and opportunities for risk-reducing interventions. METHODS AND RESULTS: This first collaborative report of the Global Diagnostics Network (GDN) evaluated lipid distributions from nine laboratory organizations providing clinical laboratory testing in 17 countries on five continents. This cross-sectional study assessed aggregated lipid results from patients aged 20-89 years, tested at GDN laboratories, from 2018 through 2020. In addition to mean levels, the World Health Organization total cholesterol risk target (<5.00 mmol/L, <193 mg/dL) and proportions in guideline-based low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) categories were assessed. This study of 461 888 753 lipid results found wide variation by country/region, sex, and age. In most countries, total cholesterol and LDL-C peaked at 50-59 years in females and 40-49 years in males. Sex- and age-group adjusted mean total cholesterol levels ranged from 4.58 mmol/L (177.1 mg/dL) in the Republic of Korea to 5.40 mmol/L (208.8 mg/dL) in Austria. Mean total cholesterol levels exceeded the World Health Organization target in Japan, Australia, North Macedonia, Switzerland, Germany, Slovakia, and Austria. Considering LDL-C categories, North Macedonia had the highest proportions of LDL-C results >4.91 mmol/L (>190 mg/dL) for both females (9.9%) and males (8.7%). LDL-C levels <1.55 mmol/L (<60 mg/dL) were most common among females in Canada (10.7%) and males in the UK (17.3%). CONCLUSION: With nearly a half billion lipid results, this study sheds light on the worldwide variability in lipid levels, which may reflect inter-country differences in genetics, lipid testing, lifestyle habits, and pharmacologic treatment. Despite variability, elevated atherogenic lipid levels are a common global problem, and these results can help inform national policies and health system approaches to mitigate lipid-mediated risk of cardiovascular disease.

Clinical implications of estrone sulfate measurement in laboratory medicine.

Estrone sulfate (E1S) is the most abundant circulating estrogen and it has the potential to be used as a biomarker in certain conditions where estimation of low levels of estrogen or changes in relative levels of estrogens are important. This review will critically consider the role of estimating E1S for clinical laboratory practice. As E1S is an estrogen, a wider discussion of estrogens is included to contextualize the review. Assays have been available for a number of years for these estrogens and they have been measured in a number of clinical research studies. However, E1S remains a rarely ordered test. This review highlights the literature that suggests the possible advantages of measuring E1S in addition to, or possibly in place of, the more commonly measured estradiol (E2) and the less commonly measured estrone (E1). The potential biomarker role of E1S in risk stratification for breast cancer, in promotion of proliferation of endometrial cancer, in prognostic information in advanced prostatic carcinoma, and in the monitoring of response to certain hormonal therapy for malignancy is discussed. The methods available for the measurement of E1S are reviewed and the limitations of the current methodologies are described. In conclusion, E1S has some interesting potential applications in clinical laboratory medicine that require further investigation.

Point-of-care testing (POCT) and evidence-based laboratory medicine (EBLM) - does it leverage any advantage in clinical decision making?

Point-of-care testing (POCT) is the analysis of patient specimens outside the clinical laboratory, near or at the site of patient care, usually performed by clinical staff without laboratory training, although it also encompasses patient self-monitoring. It is able to provide a rapid result near the patient and which can be acted upon immediately. The key driver is the concept that clinical decision making may be delayed when samples are sent to the clinical laboratory. Balanced against this are considerations of increased costs for purchase and maintenance of equipment, staff training, connectivity to the laboratory information system (LIS), quality control (QC) and external quality assurance (EQA) procedures, all required for accreditation under ISO 22870. The justification for POCT depends upon being able to demonstrate that a more timely result (shorter turnaround times (TATs)) is able to leverage a clinically important advantage in decision making compared with the central laboratory (CL). In the four decades since POCT was adapted for the self-monitoring of blood glucose levels by subjects with diabetes, numerous new POCT methodologies have become available, enabling the clinician to receive results and initiate treatment more rapidly. However, these instruments are often operated by staff not trained in laboratory medicine and hence are prone to errors in the analytical phase (as opposed to laboratory testing where the analytical phase has the least errors). In some environments, particularly remote rural settings, the CL may be at a considerable distance and timely availability of cardiac troponins and other analytes can triage referrals to the main centers, thus avoiding expensive unnecessary patient transportation costs. However, in the Emergency Department, availability of more rapid results with POCT does not always translate into shorter stays due to other barriers to implementation of care. In this review, we apply the principles of evidence-based laboratory medicine (EBLM) looking for high quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses, ideally underpinned by randomized controlled trials (RCTs), looking for evidence of whether POCT confers any advantage in clinical decision making in different scenarios.

BNP and NT-proBNP as prognostic markers in persons with acute decompensated heart failure: a systematic review.

A systematic review was undertaken to examine the evidence for B-type natriuretic peptides (BNP and NT-proBNP) as independent predictors of mortality, morbidity, or combined mortality and morbidity outcomes in persons with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). Electronic databases (Medline(®), Embase™, AMED, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL) were searched from 1989 to June 2012. Reference lists of included articles, systematic reviews, and the gray literature were also searched. English language studies were eligible if they included subjects with ADHF and measured BNP/NT-proBNP using FDA approved assays. Standardized forms were used to select studies, extract data, and assess risk of bias. Seventy-nine studies, ranging over followup intervals from 14 days to 7 years, evaluating levels of BNP (n = 38), NT-proBNP (n = 35), or both (n = 6) were eligible. The majority of studies predicted mortality outcomes for admission BNP/NT-proBNP levels, with fewer studies evaluating serial, change from admission, or discharge levels. In general, higher levels of admission BNP or NT-proBNP predicted greater risk for all outcomes. Decreased levels post-admission predicted decreased risk. Overall, these studies were rated as having moderate risk of bias. This systematic review shows that BNP and NT-proBNP are independent predictors of mortality (all-cause and cardiovascular) in ADHF despite different cutpoints, time intervals, and prognostic models. Findings for morbidity and composite outcomes were less frequently evaluated and showed inconsistency. Further research is required to assess cutpoints for admission, serial measurements, change following admission, and discharge levels to assist clinical decision-making.

Incremental predictive value of natriuretic peptides for prognosis in the chronic stable heart failure population: a systematic review.

The aim of this study was to determine whether measurement of natriuretic peptides independently adds incremental predictive value for mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic stable heart failure (CSHF). We electronically searched Medline®, Embase™, AMED, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL from 1989 to June 2012. We also searched reference lists of included articles, systematic reviews, and the gray literature. Studies were screened for eligibility criteria and assessed for methodological quality. Data were extracted on study design, population demographics, assay cutpoints, prognostic risk prediction model covariates, statistical methods, outcomes, and results. One hundred and eighty-three studies were identified as prognostic in the systematic review. From these, 15 studies (all NT-proBNP) considered incremental predictive value in CSHF subjects. Follow-up varied from 12 to 37 months. All studies presented at least one estimate of incremental predictive value of NT-proBNP relative to the base prognostic model. Using discrimination or likelihood statistics, these studies consistently showed that NT-proBNP increased model performance. Three studies used re-classification and model validation computations to establish incremental predictive value; these studies showed less consistency with respect to added value. Although there were differences in the base risk prediction models, assay cutpoints, and lengths of follow-up, there was consistency in NT-proBNP adding incremental predictive value for prognostic models in chronic stable CSHF patients. The limitations in the literature suggest that studies designed to evaluate prognostic models should be undertaken to evaluate the incremental value of natriuretic peptide as a predictor of mortality and morbidity in CSHF.

B-type natriuretic peptide-guided therapy: a systematic review.

BNP/NT-proBNP measurement has not gained widespread use for the management of patients with heart failure (HF) despite several randomized controlled trials. A systematic review addressing the question of whether patients with HF benefit from BNP-assisted therapy or intensified therapy compared with usual care was undertaken. Relevant randomized controlled trial (RCTs) were selected by searching Medline, Embase, AMED, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL for English-language articles published from 1980 to 2012. Selected studies required patients to be treated for chronic HF with medical therapy based on BNP/NT-proBNP or usual care. There were no restrictions except that BNP/NT-proBNP measurement had to be done by an FDA approved method. Nine RCTs were identified with 2,104 patients with study duration that ranged from 3 to 18 months. Overall, there was a wide variation in study design and how parameters were reported including patient selection, baseline characteristics, therapy goals, BNP/NT-proBNP cutpoint, and outcome types. Meta-analysis was not appropriate given this study heterogeneity. The strength of evidence for the outcome of mortality, reported in seven studies, was found to be low due to inconsistency and imprecision. This systematic review showed that the evidence is of low quality and insufficient to support the use of BNP/NT-proBNP to guide HF therapy. Further trials with improved design are needed.

Incremental value of natriuretic peptide measurement in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF): a systematic review.

The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal proBNP (NT-proBNP) independently add incremental value for predicting mortality and morbidity in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). Medline(®), Embase™, AMED, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL were searched from 1989 to June 2012. We also searched reference lists of included articles, systematic reviews, and the gray literature. Studies were screened for eligibility criteria and assessed for risk of bias. Data were extracted on study design, population demographics, assay cutpoints, prognostic risk prediction model covariates, statistical methods, outcomes, and results. From 183 citations, only seven studies (5 BNP and 2 NT-proBNP) considered incremental value in ADHF subjects admitted to acute care centers. Admission assay levels and length of follow-up varied for BNP studies (31 days to 12 months) and for NT-proBNP studies (25-82 months). All studies presented at least one estimate of incremental value of BNP/NT-proBNP relative to the base prognostic model. Using discrimination or likelihood statistics, these studies consistently showed that BNP or NT-proBNP increased model performance. Three studies used reclassification and model validation computations to establish incremental value; these studies showed less consistency with respect to added value. In conclusion, the literature assessing incremental value of BNP/NT-proBNP in ADHF populations is limited to seven studies evaluating only mortality outcomes and at moderate risk of bias. Although there were differences in the base risk prediction models, assay cutpoints, and lengths of follow-up, there was consistency in BNP/NT-proBNP adding incremental value in prediction models in ADHF patients.

Prediction of clinical outcomes using B-type natriuretic peptides in the general population: a systematic review.

The use of B-type natriuretic peptides to predict outcomes in general populations has been investigated in a number of primary studies. A previous systematic review considering natriuretic peptides in cardiovascular disease included a subgroup of general population studies, which suggested an association with a number of clinical outcomes. We electronically searched Medline, Embase, AMED, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL for English-language articles published between 1989 and mid-2012. We utilized trained reviewers and standardized forms to screen articles for inclusion and extract data from included articles. All included studies (n = 7) were summarized in narrative and tabular form. A general population was defined as one that was randomly selected from a community setting where no specific inclusion or exclusion criteria were specified. The seven included studies all used FDA approved assays for NT-proBNP. The range of clinical outcomes and heterogeneity did not allow for meta-analysis. The hazard ratios for predicting outcomes in the included studies ranged from 1.0 to 4.1 (all p values <0.05). The discrimination statistics reported in four studies all demonstrated statistically significant improvements in predicting outcomes. NT-proBNP is associated with heart failure, all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, and other combined cardiovascular events in a general unselected population. The discrimination statistics suggest modest improvements in risk stratification. No prospective studies exist to demonstrate the clinical utility of using B-type natriuretic peptides to predict clinical outcomes in a general population.

Use of BNP and NT-proBNP for the diagnosis of heart failure in the emergency department: a systematic review of the evidence.

Our purpose was to determine the test performance characteristics of BNP and NT-proBNP in the diagnosis of heart failure for patients presenting to an emergency department or urgent care center. We searched Medline, Embase, AMED, Cochrane, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL for English-language articles published between 1989 and June 2012. Studies were limited to those using FDA-approved assays. We examined test performance at three pre-specified cutpoints (manufacturers' suggested, researchers' optimal, and lowest) and considered the effect of age, gender, ethnicity and renal function. We used the QUADAS-2 tool to examine risk of bias and applicability, and the AHRQ Methods Guide to assess the strength of evidence. Seventy-six articles met our inclusion criteria, 37 examined BNP, 25 examined NT-proBNP, and 14 examined both. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for BNP at the three pre-specified cutpoints were 95, 91, and 95 % (sensitivity) and 55, 80, and 67 % (specificity), respectively. For NT-proBNP, sensitivity and specificity at the same cutpoints were 91, 90, and 96 % (sensitivity) and 67, 74, and 55 % (specificity). Both BNP and NT-proBNP perform well to rule out, but less well to rule in, the diagnosis of heart failure among persons presenting to emergency departments or urgent care centers. Both BNP and NT-proBNP levels are positively associated with age and negatively associated with renal function. However, the effect of these factors with respect to selecting optimal cutpoints is unclear. For BNP, 100 pg/mL appears to be a consensus cutpoint. No clear consensus has emerged for NT-proBNP, but the age-adjusted cutpoints of 450 pg/mL for <50 years, 900 pg/mL for 50-75 years and 1,800 pg/mL for >75 years appear promising and merit greater scrutiny and validation.

Performance of BNP and NT-proBNP for diagnosis of heart failure in primary care patients: a systematic review.

National and international guidelines have been published recommending the use of natriuretic peptides as an aid to the diagnosis of heart failure (HF) in acute settings; however, few specific recommendations exist for governing the use of these peptides in primary care populations. To summarize the available data relevant to the diagnosis of HF in primary care patient population, we systematically reviewed the literature to identify original articles that investigated the diagnostic accuracy of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal proBNP (NT-proBNP) in primary care settings. The search yielded 25,864 articles in total: 12 investigating BNP and 20 investigating NT-proBNP were relevant to our objective and included in the review. QUADAS-2 and GRADE were used to assess the quality of the included articles. Diagnostic data were pooled based on three cutpoints: lowest and optimal, as chosen by study authors, and manufacturers' suggested. The effect of various determinants (e.g., age, gender, BMI, and renal function) on diagnostic performance was also investigated. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of BNP and NT-proBNP using the lowest [0.85 (sensitivity) and 0.54 (specificity)], optimal (0.80 and 0.61), and manufacturers' (0.74 and 0.67) cutpoints showed good performance for diagnosing HF. Similar performance was seen for NT-proBNP: lowest (0.90 and 0.50), optimal (0.86 and 0.58), and manufacturers' (0.82 and 0.58) cutpoints. Overall, we rated the strength of evidence as high because further studies will be unlikely to change the estimates diagnostic performance.

A systematic review of BNP and NT-proBNP in the management of heart failure: overview and methods.

B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal proBNP (NT-proBNP) levels are increased in persons with heart failure (HF); low levels of these peptides rule out HF. We systematically reviewed the literature to assess the use of BNP and NT-proBNP in the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment for HF. We also examined the biological variation of these peptides in persons with and without HF. We searched Medline, Embase, AMED, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL for English-language studies published between January 1989 and June 2012. Supplemental searches involved the gray literature and the reference lists of included studies. Trained reviewers used standardized forms to screen articles for inclusion in the review and to extract data from included papers. We examined the risk of bias with QUADAS-2 for diagnosis studies, the Hayden criteria for prognosis studies, and the Jadad scale for treatment studies. We assessed the strength of evidence in four domains (risk of bias, consistency, directness, and precision) for the diagnosis and treatment studies. Results were reported as narrative syntheses. Additional meta-analyses were conducted for the diagnosis studies. Three hundred ten articles passed through screening and were included in the review. One hundred four articles applied to diagnostic accuracy, 190 papers pertained to prognosis, and nine articles addressed BNP- or NT-proBNP-guided treatment. Each individual paper in this series reports, summarizes, and discusses the evidence regarding diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment.

BNP and NT-proBNP as prognostic markers in persons with chronic stable heart failure.

Prognosis permits clinicians to separate persons with heart failure (HF) into subgroups based on likely health outcomes. Treatment is partly guided by these likely outcomes. This systematic review explores whether brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal proBNP (NT-proBNP) are independent predictors of prognosis in persons with chronic stable HF. We electronically searched Medline, Embase, AMED, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL for English-language articles published between 1989 and mid-2012. We utilized trained reviewers and standardized forms to screen articles for inclusion and extracted data from included articles. All included studies were summarized in narrative and tabular form. We used the Hayden criteria to assess the risk of bias. Sixteen BNP publications and 88 NT-proBNP publications were included in the systematic review. BNP was positively associated with all-cause and HF mortality. NT-proBNP was positively associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. BNP and NT-proBNP levels are useful for estimating prognosis in persons with chronic stable HF. Further research is required to establish optimal cutpoints and to assess whether prognostic effects differ by age, sex, or time period.

Applicability of the AGREE II instrument in evaluating the development process and quality of current National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Laboratory medicine practice guidelines (LMPGs) are an important part of clinical laboratory medicine. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument has been developed to evaluate the process of practice-guideline development and the quality of reporting. We assessed the applicability of AGREE II in assessing the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry (NACB) LMPGs. METHODS: The NACB website was searched for all available LMPGs up to December 2011. Two independent appraisers used the AGREE II instrument to assess each LMPG identified by the search. Quality was assessed across 6 domains (scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, and editorial independence), comprising a total of 23 items and 2 overall assessments, each scored on a 7-point scale (1, strongly disagree, to 7, strongly agree). All scores were expressed as AGREE II calculated percentages (100% indicates that all items scored 7 by all appraisers). RESULTS: Eleven LMPGs were identified. All of the LMPGs provided some information seen as applicable to clinical practice by the appraisers. Only 5 of the LMPGs had overall scores ≥50%, with a median score of 42% (range: 8%-92%). Individual domain scores varied considerably from 0% to 100%. One guideline achieved a very high score on the instrument. CONCLUSIONS: The AGREE II instrument is applicable and useful to evaluate LMPGs. All domains were evaluated as being useful to assess LMPGs, some were addressed well (e.g., clarity of presentation), whereas others could be improved (e.g., applicability).

Current use of bone turnover markers in the management of osteoporosis.

The adult bone is continuously being remodelled to repair microdamage, preserve bone strength and mechanical competence as well as maintain calcium homeostasis. Bone turnover markers are products of osteoblasts (bone formation markers) and osteoclasts (bone resorption markers) providing a dynamic assessment of remodelling (turnover). Resorption-specific bone turnover markers are typically degradation products of bone collagen molecules (N- [NTX] and C-telopeptide cross-linked type 1 collagen [CTX]), which are released into the circulation and excreted in urine; or enzymatic activities reflecting osteoclastic resorption, tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase [TRACP]. Formation-specific bone turnover markers embrace different osteoblastic activities: type 1 collagen synthesis (Procollagen type I N- propeptide [PINP]), osteoblast enzymes (bone-specific alkaline phosphatase [BALP]), or bone matrix proteins [osteocalcin]. Among individuals not receiving osteoporosis treatment, resorption and formation markers are tightly linked and highly correlated (r = 0.6-0.8). Significant biological variability was reported in the past, but these issues have been greatly improved with automated assays and attention to pre-analytical and analytical factors that are known to influence bone turnover marker levels. Bone turnover markers are not useful in the diagnosis of osteoporosis, the individual prediction of bone loss, fracture, or rare complications, or in the selection of pharmacological treatment. Despite remaining issues with reference intervals and assays harmonization, bone turnover markers have proven to be useful in elucidating the pharmacodynamics and effectiveness of osteoporosis medications in clinical trials. As an alternative to BMD testing, BTMs may be useful to monitor osteoporosis therapies.

Lot verification practices in Ontario clinical chemistry laboratories - Results of a patterns-of-practice survey.

Objectives: Verifying new reagent or calibrator lots is crucial for maintaining consistent test performance. The Institute for Quality Management in Healthcare (IQMH) conducted a patterns-of-practice survey and follow-up case study to collect information on lot verification practices in Ontario. Methods: The survey had 17 multiple-choice questions and was distributed to 183 licensed laboratories. Participants provided information on materials used and approval/rejection criteria for their lot verification procedures for eight classes of testing systems. The case study provided a set of lot comparison data and was distributed to 132 laboratories. Responses were reviewed by IQMH scientific committees. Results: Of the 175 laboratories that responded regarding reagent lot verifications, 74% verified all tests, 11% some, and 15% none. Of the 171 laboratories that responded regarding calibrator lot verifications, 39% verified all calibrators, 4% some, and 57% none. Reasons for not performing verifications ranged from difficulty performing parallel testing to high reagent cost. For automated chemistry assays and immunoassays, 23% of laboratories did not include patient-derived materials in reagent lot verifications and 42% included five to six patient materials; 58% of laboratories did not include patient-derived materials in calibrator lot verifications and 23% included five to six patient materials. Different combinations of test-specific rules were used for acceptance criteria. For a failed lot, 98% of laboratories would investigate further and take corrective actions. Forty-three percent of laboratories would accept the new reagent lot in the case study. Conclusion: Responses to the survey and case study demonstrated variability in lot verification practices among laboratories.