Assessment of accuracy of laboratory testing results, relative to peer group consensus values in external quality control, by bivariate z-score analysis: the example of D-Dimer.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to develop a practical method for bivariate z-score analysis which can be applied to the survey of an external quality assessment programme. METHODS: To develop the bivariate z-score analysis, the results of four surveys of the international D-Dimer external quality assessment programme of 2022 of the ECAT Foundation were used. The proposed methodology starts by identifying the bivariate outliers, using a Supervised Sequential Hotelling T2 control chart. The outlying data are removed, and all the remaining data are used to provide robust estimates of the parameters of the assumed underlying bivariate normal distribution. Based on these estimates two nested homocentric ellipses are drawn, corresponding to confidence levels of 95 and 99.7 %. The bivariate z-score plot described provides the laboratory with an indication of both systematic and random deviations from zero z-score values. The bivariate z-score analysis was examined within survey 2022-D4 across the three most frequently used methods. RESULTS: The number of z-score pairs included varied between 830 and 857 and the number of bivariate outliers varied between 20 and 28. The correlation between the z-score pairs varied between 0.431 and 0.647. The correlation between the z-score pairs for the three most frequently used varied between 0.208 and 0.636. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the bivariate z-score analysis is of major importance when multiple samples are distributed around in the same survey and dependency of the results is likely. Important lessons can be drawn from the shape of the ellipse with respect to random and systematic deviations, while individual laboratories have been informed about their position in the state-of-the-art distribution and whether they have to deal with systematic and/or random deviations.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of within-subject and between-subject biological variation data of coagulation and fibrinolytic measurands.

OBJECTIVES: The diagnosis and monitoring of bleeding and thrombotic disorders depend on correct haemostatic measurements. The availability of high-quality biological variation (BV) data is important in this context. Many studies have reported BV data for these measurands, but results are varied. The present study aims to deliver global within-subject (CVI) and between-subject (CVG) BV estimates for haemostasis measurands by meta-analyses of eligible studies, by assessment with the Biological Variation Data Critical Appraisal Checklist (BIVAC). METHODS: Relevant BV studies were graded by the BIVAC. Weighted estimates for CVI and CVG were obtained via meta-analysis of the BV data derived from BIVAC-compliant studies (graded A-C; whereby A represents optimal study design) performed in healthy adults. RESULTS: In 26 studies BV data were reported for 35 haemostasis measurands. For 9 measurands, only one eligible publication was identified and meta-analysis could not be performed. 74% of the publications were graded as BIVAC C. The CVI and CVG varied extensively between the haemostasis measurands. The highest estimates were observed for PAI-1 antigen (CVI 48.6%; CVG 59.8%) and activity (CVI 34.9%; CVG 90.2%), while the lowest were observed for activated protein C resistance ratio (CVI 1.5%; CVG 4.5%). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides updated BV estimates of CVI and CVG with 95% confidence intervals for a wide range of haemostasis measurands. These estimates can be used to form the basis for analytical performance specifications for haemostasis tests used in the diagnostic work-up required in bleeding- and thrombosis events and for risk assessment.

How Do Laboratories Perform von Willebrand Disease Diagnostics and Classification of von Willebrand Disease Patients? Results from External Quality Data and an International Survey.

BACKGROUND: Reduced or dysfunctional von Willebrand factor (VWF) may lead to von Willebrand disease (VWD), which is a common inherited bleeding disorder. VWD is classified into three major types: type 1 is a partial quantitative deficiency of VWF, type 3 is a complete quantitative deficiency of VWF, and type 2 consists of qualitative abnormalities of VWF. To arrive at a correct VWD diagnosis, multiple tests and a correct interpretation of these tests are needed. AIM: The aim of the present study was to gain insight into the approach of laboratories toward VWD diagnosis. METHODS: Data from four samples of the external quality assessment (EQA) VWF surveys of the ECAT (External Quality Control for Assays and Tests) were evaluated. Furthermore, results were analyzed of a questionnaire that was sent to hemostasis laboratories about VWD diagnostic approaches. RESULTS: For most EQA samples, the majority of participants indicated the correct classification. However, 6 to 60% indicated another classification. For all samples, significant differences in VWF results were observed between the correct and incorrect classifications. The questionnaire demonstrated that the testing approach varied between the laboratories, especially for parameters that were essential for discrimination between VWD type 1 and healthy individuals, as well as the cutoff values used to discriminate VWD types 1 and 2. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis of VWD is heterogeneous in diagnostic approach, guidelines, and cutoff values within large ranges of VWF results between laboratories. Harmonization of approaches and increased accuracy of VWF measurements may help to establish a correct diagnosis.

How Do Laboratories Perform von Willebrand Disease Diagnostics and Classification of von Willebrand Disease Patients? Results from External Quality Data and an International Survey.

BACKGROUND: Reduced or dysfunctional von Willebrand factor (VWF) may lead to von Willebrand disease (VWD), which is a common inherited bleeding disorder. VWD is classified into three major types: type 1 is a partial quantitative deficiency of VWF, type 3 is a complete quantitative deficiency of VWF, and type 2 consists of qualitative abnormalities of VWF. To arrive at a correct VWD diagnosis, multiple tests and a correct interpretation of these tests are needed. AIM: The aim of the present study was to gain insight into the approach of laboratories toward VWD diagnosis. METHODS: Data from four samples of the external quality assessment (EQA) VWF surveys of the ECAT (External Quality Control for Assays and Tests) were evaluated. Furthermore, results were analyzed of a questionnaire that was sent to hemostasis laboratories about VWD diagnostic approaches. RESULTS: For most EQA samples, the majority of participants indicated the correct classification. However, 6 to 60% indicated another classification. For all samples, significant differences in VWF results were observed between the correct and incorrect classifications. The questionnaire demonstrated that the testing approach varied between the laboratories, especially for parameters that were essential for discrimination between VWD type 1 and healthy individuals, as well as the cutoff values used to discriminate VWD types 1 and 2. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis of VWD is heterogeneous in diagnostic approach, guidelines, and cutoff values within large ranges of VWF results between laboratories. Harmonization of approaches and increased accuracy of VWF measurements may help to establish a correct diagnosis.

Diagnostic Testing for von Willebrand Disease: Trends and Insights from North American Laboratories over the Last Decade.

Accurate diagnosis of von Willebrand disease (VWD) depends on the quality, precision, and variability of the laboratory assays. The North American Specialized Coagulation Laboratory Association (NASCOLA) is a provider of external quality assessment (EQA) for approximately 60 specialized coagulation laboratories in North America. In this report, NASCOLA EQA data from 2010 to 2021 are reviewed for trends in methodology and precision among various assays. In particular, recent ASH ISTH NHF WFH (American Society of Hematology, International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis, National Hemophilia Foundation, and World Hemophilia Federation) guidelines for diagnosis of VWD are reviewed in light of EQA data. In contrast to other geographic regions, laboratories in North America predominantly use three-assay screening panels (antigen, platelet-binding activity, and factor VIII [FVIII] activity) rather than four-assay panels (antigen, platelet-binding activity, FVIII activity, and collagen-binding activity). They also use latex immunoassays rather than chemiluminescence immunoassays, and the classic ristocetin cofactor (VWF:RCo) assay and monoclonal antibody (VWF:Ab) assay to assess VWF platelet-binding activity over newer recommended assays (VWF:GPIbM and VWF:GPIbR). Factors that may be influencing these North American practice patterns include lack of Food and Drug Administration approval of the VWF:GPIbM, VWF:GPIbR, collagen binding assays, and chemiluminescence methodologies, and the influence of the 2008 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute guidelines on laboratory practice. Lastly, systems-based solutions are urgently needed to improve the overall accuracy of laboratory testing for VWD by minimizing preanalytical variables and adopting assay standardization.

Diagnosis of von Willebrand disease: An assessment of the quality of testing in North American laboratories.

BACKGROUND: Laboratory diagnosis of von Willebrand Disease (VWD) is complex. Reliance on laboratory testing can be problematic as different VWD screening panels, assays and methodologies can produce analytic variability in test results. OBJECTIVES: To compare the degree of imprecision among the VWD assays and within the platelet binding activity (PBA) assays, to determine the consensus among the VWD assays for correct classification of sample results, and to determine consensus among laboratories' von Willebrand factor (VWF) multimer interpretations and final interpretations of the VWD panels. PATIENTS/METHODS: Proficiency testing results from the North American Specialized Coagulation Laboratory Association (NASCOLA) submitted by laboratories from 2010 to 2019 for all normal, type (T) 1 VWD and T2 VWD samples were analysed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Imprecision was lowest for VWF antigen and highest for collagen binding activity (CBA) with median coefficient of variation (CV) of 12% (interquartile range (IQR) 7%) and 23% (IQR 21%) respectively. Within the VWF PBA assays, the gain-of-function mutant GP1b binding (VWF: GP1bM) methods had the least imprecision (CV 9%, IQR 10%). All assays, including the various PBA methods had excellent consensus. The majority of laboratories agreed that normal (median consensus-82%, IQR 16%) and T1 VWD (median consensus-100%, IQR 9%) samples had normal multimer distribution. Consensus among laboratories for final interpretations was excellent for normal samples (median 81%, IQR 8%), good for T1 VWD samples (median 59%, IQR 9%), and fair for T2 VWD samples (median 44%, IQR 21%). Consensus on final interpretation decreased as sample complexity increased.

International external quality assessment for measurements of direct oral anticoagulants: results and recommendations.

There is limited information regarding the performance of tests for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). To generate more knowledge, the accuracy of DOAC tests were evaluated using external quality assessment data from multiple years. This data demonstrated a good correlation for the tests with a small overall interlaboratory variability (10% for dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban and 12% for edoxaban). The greatest differences between the various reagents were observed for rivaroxaban, especially for concentrations below 100 ng/ml. In conclusion, the results show overall reliable DOAC levels with some differences between reagent groups. Important finding: clinical decision criteria could be affected by the choice of reagent.

Quality performance for indirect Xa inhibitor monitoring in patients using international external quality data.

Objectives Chromogenic anti-activated factor X (FXa) assays are currently the "gold standard" for monitoring indirect anticoagulants. However, anti-FXa has been shown to vary according to the choice of reagents. In the present study, the performance of anti-FXa measurement was evaluated in order to gain more insight into the clinical applications. Furthermore, the longitudinal coefficient of variation (CV) was studied to investigate whether there is improvement over time. Methods Laboratory tests results were evaluated for samples spiked with unfractionated heparin (UFH), low-molecular-weight-heparin (LMWH), fondaparinux and danaparoid sodium. External quality assessment (EQA) data from multiple years were used from more than 100 laboratories. Results Comparison of the results for all methods showed significant differences in measured values between the frequently used methods (ANOVA: p < 0.001). The largest differences were observed for LMWH and UFH measurements. These differences may be caused by differences in method composition, such as the addition of dextran sulphate. Substantial interlaboratory variation in anti-FXa monitoring was observed for all parameters, particularly at low concentrations. Our results showed that below 0.35 IU/mL, the CVs for UFH and LMWH increase dramatically and results below this limit should be used with caution. Conclusions Our study demonstrates that the choice of the anti-FXa method is particularly important for UFH and LMWH measurement. The variation in measurements may have an effect on clinical implications, such as therapeutic ranges. Furthermore, the longitudinal EQA data demonstrated a constant performance and, in at least 50% of the cases, improvement in the CV% of the anti-Xa results over time.

Analytical variation in factor VIII one-stage and chromogenic assays: Experiences from the ECAT external quality assessment programme.

BACKGROUND: Both one-stage (OSA) and chromogenic substrate assays (CSA) are used to measure factor VIII (FVIII) activity. Factors explaining analytical variation in FVIII activity levels are still to be completely elucidated. AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate and quantify the analytical variation in OSA and CSA. METHODS: Factors determining analytical variation were studied in sixteen lyophilized plasma samples (FVIII activity <0.01-1.94 IU/mL) and distributed by the ECAT surveys. To elucidate the causes of OSA variation, we exchanged deficient plasma between three company set-ups. RESULTS: On average, 206 (range 164-230) laboratories used the OSA to measure FVIII activity and 30 (range 12-51) used CSA. The coefficient of variation of OSA and CSA increased with lower FVIII levels (FVIII <0.05 IU/mL). This resulted in misclassification of a severe haemophilia A sample into a moderate or mild haemophilia A sample in 4/30 (13.3%) of CSA measurements, while this was 37/139 (26.6%) for OSA. OSA measurements performed with reagents and equipment from Werfen showed slightly lower FVIII activity (0.93, IQR 0.88-0.98 IU/mL) compared to measurements with Stago (1.07, IQR 1.02-1.14 IU/mL) and Siemens (1.03, IQR 0.97-1.07 IU/mL). Part of this difference is explained by the value of the calibrator. For CSA, the measured FVIII levels were similar using the different kits. CONCLUSIONS: In the lower range (<0.05 IU/mL), analytical variation of FVIII measurements is high in both OSA and CSA measurements. The variation in FVIII activity levels was partly explained by specific manufacturers. Further standardization of FVIII measurements and understanding of analytical variation is required.

Determination of sigma score based on biological variation for haemostasis assays: fit-for-purpose for daily practice?

Background Internal quality control (QC) rules for laboratory tests can be derived from analytical performance specifications (APS) using the six-sigma method. We tested the applicability of this paradigm to routine haemostasis measurements. Methods Three laboratories using different instruments and reagents calculated sigma scores for their prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), fibrinogen and antithrombin (AT) measurements. Sigma scores were calculated using biological variation (BV) data from the literature in combination with internal and external QC data. Results Wide ranges in sigma scores for the PT (0.1-6.8), APTT (0.0-4.3), fibrinogen (1.5-8.3) and AT (0.1-2.4) were observed when QC data was combined with the minimum, median and maximum value of BV data, due in particular to a large variation in within-subject and between-subjects coefficients of variation. When the median BV values were applied, most sigma scores were below 3.0, for internal QC data; 75% and for external QC data; 92%. Conclusions Our findings demonstrate that: (1) The sigma scores for common haemostasis parameters are relatively low, and (2) The application of the six-sigma method to BV-derived APS is hampered by the large variation in published BV data. As the six-sigma concept is based on requirements for monitoring, and many haemostasis tests are only designed for diagnostic purposes, a fit-for-purpose APS is needed to achieve clinically relevant quality goals.

Pre-analytical practices for routine coagulation tests in European laboratories. A collaborative study from the European Organisation for External Quality Assurance Providers in Laboratory Medicine (EQALM).

Background Correct handling and storage of blood samples for coagulation tests are important to assure correct diagnosis and monitoring. The aim of this study was to assess the pre-analytical practices for routine coagulation testing in European laboratories. Methods In 2013-2014, European laboratories were invited to fill in a questionnaire addressing pre-analytical requirements regarding tube fill volume, citrate concentration, sample stability, centrifugation and storage conditions for routine coagulation testing (activated partial thromboplastin time [APTT], prothrombin time in seconds [PT-sec] and as international normalised ratio [PT-INR] and fibrinogen). Results A total of 662 laboratories from 28 different countries responded. The recommended 3.2% (105-109 mmol/L) citrate tubes are used by 74% of the laboratories. Tube fill volumes ≥90% were required by 73%-76% of the laboratories, depending upon the coagulation test and tube size. The variation in centrifugation force and duration was large (median 2500 g [10- and 90-percentiles 1500 and 4000] and 10 min [5 and 15], respectively). Large variations were also seen in the accepted storage time for different tests and sample materials, for example, for citrated blood at room temperature the accepted storage time ranged from 0.5-72 h and 0.5-189 h for PT-INR and fibrinogen, respectively. If the storage time or the tube fill requirements are not fulfilled, 72% and 84% of the respondents, respectively, would reject the samples. Conclusions There was a large variation in pre-analytical practices for routine coagulation testing in European laboratories, especially for centrifugation conditions and storage time requirements.

Towards harmonization of external quality assessment/proficiency testing in hemostasis.

Quality in diagnostic testing represents a key target of laboratory medicine, for which an assurance around the quality of testing is expected from all involved in the process. Laboratories attempt to assure the quality of their testing by various processes, but especially by performance of internal quality control and external quality assessment (EQA). This is especially true for tests of hemostasis and coagulation. EQA in general provides information on test accuracy and on evaluation of long-term laboratory performance. EQA providers support laboratory performance by various means, including distribution of material for testing of analytes ("proficiency testing"), educational support through expert advice, distribution of publications or case series. Participation in EQA is often a laboratory accreditation requirement. This review aims to identify some of the strengths and weaknesses of EQA, and targets attempts towards harmonization of EQA practice, in order to achieve the best outcome for participant laboratories and, thus, for patients and their clinical care providers.

Biological Variation of Hemostasis Variables in Thrombosis and Bleeding: Consequences for Performance Specifications.

BACKGROUND: Levels of hemostasis factors vary between and within individuals as a result of genetic and environmental factors and analytical variation of the assays. The current state of the art for defining analytical precision requirements for analytical testing is based on this between- and within-individual (biological) variation. However, information on biological variation in hemostasis variables is still limited.The aim of this study was to determine the biological variation of coagulation variables involved in thrombosis and bleeding to provide a recommendation for performance specifications and to assess whether hemostasis assays fulfill the recommendation. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal study by repeated blood sampling (in total 13 times over a 1-year period) in 40 healthy individuals and measured prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), fibrinogen, antithrombin, factor VIII, factor IX, von Willebrand factor (VWF), protein C, and protein S. We evaluated the effect of the biological variation on parameters of analytical variation and propose required performance specifications. RESULTS: Biological variation was highly different for various hemostasis variables: the within-subject variation ranged from 2.6% (PT) to 25.6% [VWF collagen binding (CB) activity], the between-subject variation varied from 4.1% (PT) to 31.2% (VWF:ristocetin cofactor acitivity), and the assay variation from 1.3% (PT) to 12.9% (VWF:CB). CONCLUSIONS: With the reagents and analyzers used in this study, most of the hemostasis tests variables fulfill the current quality criteria for diagnosis and monitoring of routine hemostasis assays.

Testing for dabigatran and rivaroxaban by clinical laboratories.

Rivaroxaban and dabigatran are among the newest anticoagulants, and measuring their concentration in patients is a new challenge for clinical laboratories. We analyzed data from the ECAT proficiency program to determine how well the assays are performing in clinical laboratories internationally. Most laboratories received a passing grade (Z score <3) for the results of their dabigatran and rivaroxaban testing. Failing Z scores were not associated with any particular method. With dabigatran, some homemade calibrators gave higher results than the commercially available calibrators. There were no significant differences among the instruments or the 5 reagents in use, but results showed inter-laboratory variability that could have clinical significance. The 3 reagents with the lowest number of users had poor inter-laboratory precision. Ten different anti-Xa reagents were in use for rivaroxaban testing. One reagent gave lower results than other reagents at 100 ng/mL but not at 300 ng/mL. There were no significant differences among the different rivaroxaban calibrators or instruments. In conclusion, inter-laboratory precision could be improved for both dabigatran and rivaroxaban assays. Homemade dabigatran calibrators differed from commercially available calibrators, and there was a statistically significant difference between some of the rivaroxaban reagents. About 10% of results received failing Z scores or passed but fell in a range that require the laboratory to investigate for bias or other inaccuracy in their method. Am. J. Hematol. 91:E464-E467, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

An international study of how laboratories handle and evaluate patient samples after detecting an unexpected APTT prolongation.

BACKGROUND: An unexpectedly detected prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) can be a harmless laboratory finding, but can also reflect a thrombotic tendency or a bleeding disorder. The assistance of laboratory professionals in the interpretation of an unexpectedly detected prolonged APTT (uAPTT) is often required. The way in which uAPTTs are evaluated in laboratories was assessed in this international study with the aim of determining whether laboratory professionals are able to fulfill this need. METHODS: Postanalytical practices after uAPTT were investigated and the mixing study methodology (if used) was studied by circulating a case report with a questionnaire to staff in the invited laboratories. In addition, the interpretations of those staff regarding the presence or absence of inhibitors in three APTT mixing study scenarios were examined. RESULTS: Large within- and between-country variations were detected in both postanalytical practices and mixing study methodologies among the 990 responding laboratories, 90% of which were in 13 countries. Shortcomings regarding the investigation of uAPTTs leading to potentially incorrect or delayed clinical diagnoses were found in 88% of the laboratories. Of the laboratories to which the interpretative questions were sent, 49% interpreted all mixing study scenarios correctly. uAPTTs were investigated appropriately and all mixing study scenarios interpreted correctly in parallel in only 9.6% of the participating laboratories. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical requirement for the assistance of laboratory professionals in the interpretation of uAPTTs cannot be met at most of the participating laboratories. Laboratory professionals should be trained in the evaluation of ordinary laboratory tests, such as that for uAPTTs.

Proficiency testing results for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in north america.

Between 2010 and 2012, North American Specialized Coagulation Laboratory Association (NASCOLA) distributed five proficiency testing challenges to evaluate laboratory testing for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). Results (n = 355) were submitted from 43 unique laboratories for 10 samples (3 positive, 2 weak positive, and 5 negative). The vast majority of results were from commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methods, predominantly polyvalent assays. Laboratories performed well in the classification of clear negative and positive samples. All results (100%) submitted for the five negative samples (n = 173) and 97% of immunological results submitted for the three positive samples (n = 105) were correctly classified (the incorrect responses were two borderline classifications and, from a gel-agglutination method, one negative classification). There was more difficulty in the classification of the two weak positive samples (n = 70). In one survey, 61% of results from the weak positive sample were classified as positive, while 21% were called negative, 16% were called borderline, and 2% were called inconclusive. In a second survey, 16% of results from the weak positive sample were called positive, while 56% were called negative, and 28% were called borderline. Significant interlaboratory variation was observed for ELISA results, with coefficients of variation of about 20 to 30%. We conclude that there is variability in HIT laboratory testing and that identification of weak positive samples can be challenging.

Factor XIII Assays and associated problems for laboratory diagnosis of factor XIII deficiency: an analysis of International Proficiency testing results.

We analyzed results from the External quality Control of diagnostic Assays and Tests program to assess current clinical laboratory practice and performance of different methods for factor XIII (FXIII) testing internationally. FXIII proficiency testing data from all eight surveys conducted in 2010 and 2011 were analyzed (1,283 results), comparing the three available methods for detecting FXIII deficiency, thus including clot-solubility qualitative activity, quantitative activity, and antigen. Clot-solubility qualitative assays detected a deficiency in only 16% (11/69) of samples with less than 2% FXIII. Assays using added thrombin detected more deficiencies (33%) than did assays without added thrombin (11%). The most commonly used quantitative activity method tended to produce higher results for low FXIII samples than other quantitative activity methods. Antigen results generally showed good accuracy compared with expected levels. The mean interlaboratory coefficients of variation showed wide variability, especially for samples with less than 10% FXIII activity. Laboratory self-classification of results (as normal vs. abnormal) was good, and was slightly better for specimens with ≤ 25% FXIII than for specimens with 26 to 70% or those with >70% FXIII. We conclude that quantitative activity assays perform better for detecting FXIII deficiency than clot solubility assays, although some quantitative activity assays overestimate low FXIII levels.

External quality assurance in the era of standardization.

Metrology in clinical chemistry aims to ensure the equivalence of measurement results from different in-vitro diagnostic measurement devices (IVD MD) for use in healthcare. The metrological traceability of measurement results to higher-order references is the cornerstone to achieving equivalent results. However, other fundamentals are also needed, including the commutability of reference materials and external quality assessment (EQA) materials for monitoring the equivalence of measurement results at the end-user level. This manuscript summarizes the findings and opinions expressed at the Joint Community for Traceability in Laboratory Medicine (JCTLM) workshop held on December 4-5, 2023. The workshop explored the relationship between EQA/proficiency testing and metrological traceability to higher-order references. EQA monitors the equivalence of measurement results from end-user IVD MDs. The workshop discussed the role and challenges of using EQA to improve and maintain the equivalence of measurement results. It also elucidated current developments in establishing the clinical suitability of laboratory results expressed as analytical performance specifications (APS).

D-dimer diagnostics: can I use any D-dimer assay? Bridging the knowledge-to-action gap.

A State of the Art lecture titled "D-dimer Diagnostics: Can I use any D-dimer assay? Bridging the Knowledge-to-Action gap" was presented at the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Congress in 2023, included in the session on the clinical impact of variability in commonly used coagulation assays. Here, we review the role of D-dimer, primarily in the outpatient diagnosis of patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) when combined with clinical decision rules. We focus on the recent large management trials that have studied adjustments of VTE exclusion thresholds for D-dimer based on either prior clinical probability of VTE or patient age, and the resultant benefit of reduced imaging for VTE and improved diagnostic efficiency. In this context, we report on the significant variability between D-dimer results and the multiple D-dimer assays in use worldwide using data from international external quality assurance programs. This variability is particularly high at typical VTE exclusion thresholds. We discuss the potential clinical impact of D-dimer assay substitution on accuracy of diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with VTE. Finally, we summarize relevant new data on this topic presented during the 2023 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Congress and outline future priorities urgently needed to harmonize D-dimer results and reporting that will require international collaboration among multiple stakeholders with an overall goal to close this knowledge-to-action gap.

Defining a metrologically traceable and sustainable calibration hierarchy of international normalized ratio for monitoring of vitamin K antagonist treatment in accordance with International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 17511:2020 standard: communication from the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine-SSC/ISTH working group on prothrombin time/international normalized ratio standardization.

Calibration of prothrombin time (PT) in terms of international normalized ratio (INR) has been outlined in "Guidelines for thromboplastins and plasmas used to control oral anticoagulant therapy" (World Health Organization, 2013). The international standard ISO 17511:2020 presents requirements for manufacturers of in vitro diagnostic (IVD) medical devices (MDs) for documenting the calibration hierarchy for a measured quantity in human samples using a specified IVD MD. The objective of this article is to define an unequivocal, metrologically traceable calibration hierarchy for the INR measured in plasma as well as in whole blood samples. Calibration of PT and INR for IVD MDs according to World Health Organization guidelines is similar to that in cases where there is a reference measurement procedure that defines the measurand for value assignment as described in ISO 17511:2020. We conclude that, for PT/INR standardization, the optimal calibration hierarchy includes a primary process to prepare an international reference reagent and measurement procedure that defines the measurand by a value assignment protocol conforming to clause 5.3 of ISO 17511:2020. A panel of freshly prepared human plasma samples from healthy adult individuals and patients on vitamin K antagonists is used as a commutable secondary calibrator as described in ISO 17511:2020. A sustainable metrologically traceable calibration hierarchy for INR should be based on an international protocol for value assignment with a single primary reference thromboplastin and the harmonized manual tilt tube technique for clotting time determination. The primary international reference thromboplastin reagent should be used only for calibration of successive batches of the secondary reference thromboplastin reagent.