Ensuring accuracy in the development and application of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for infectious disease.

Diagnostic tests were heralded as crucial during the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic with most of the key methods using bioanalytical approaches that detected larger molecules (RNA, protein antigens or antibodies) rather than conventional clinical biochemical techniques. Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs), like the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), and other molecular methods, like sequencing (that often work in combination with NAATs), were essential to the diagnosis and management during COVID-19. This was exemplified both early in the pandemic but also later on, following the emergence of new genetic SARS-CoV-2 variants. The 100 day mission to respond to future pandemic threats highlights the need for effective diagnostics, therapeutics and vaccines. Of the three, diagnostics represents the first opportunity to manage infectious diseases while also being the most poorly supported in terms of the infrastructure needed to demonstrate effectiveness. Where performance targets exist, they are not well served by consensus on how to demonstrate they are being met; this includes analytical factors such as limit of detection (LOD) false positive results as well as how to approach clinical evaluation. The selection of gold standards or use of epidemiological factors such as predictive value, reference ranges or clinical thresholds are seldom correctly considered. The attention placed on molecular diagnostic tests during COVID-19 illustrates important considerations and assumptions on the use of these methods for infectious disease diagnosis and beyond. In this manuscript, we discuss state-of-the-art approaches to diagnostic evaluation and explore how they may be better tailored to diagnostic techniques like NAATs to maximise the impact of these highly versatile bioanalytical tools, both generally and during future outbreaks.

Acceptability and experience of a personalised proteomic risk intervention for type 2 diabetes in primary care: qualitative interview study with patients and healthcare providers.

AIM: We explored the acceptability of a personalised proteomic risk intervention for patients at increased risk of type 2 diabetes and their healthcare providers, as well as their experience of participating in the delivery of proteomic-based risk feedback in UK primary care. BACKGROUND: Advances in proteomics now allow the provision of personalised proteomic risk reports, with the intention of achieving positive behaviour change. This technology has the potential to encourage behaviour change in people at risk of developing type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A semi-structured interview study was carried out with patients at risk of type 2 diabetes and their healthcare providers in primary care in the North of England. Participants (n = 17) and healthcare provider (n = 4) were interviewed either face to face or via telephone. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. This qualitative study was nested within a single-arm pilot trial and undertaken in primary care. FINDINGS: The personalised proteomic risk intervention was generally acceptable and the experience was positive. The personalised nature of the report was welcomed, especially the way it provided a holistic approach to risks of organ damage and lifestyle factors. Insights were provided as to how this may change behaviour. Some participants reported difficulties in understanding the format of the presentation of risk and expressed surprise at receiving risk estimates for conditions other than type 2 diabetes. Personalised proteomic risk interventions have the potential to provide holistic and comprehensive assessments of risk factors and lifestyle factors which may lead to positive behaviour change.

Early economic evaluation of an intervention to improve uptake of the NHS England Diabetes Prevention Programme.

BACKGROUND: Despite reported increases in referral numbers, a large proportion of those with prediabetes still decline participation in the NHS England Diabetes Prevention Programme (NDPP). The aim of this study was to explore whether investment in interventions to improve uptake of the programme has the potential to be cost-effective. METHODS: An early cost-utility analysis was conducted using a Markov model parameterized based on secondary data sources. We explored different uptake scenarios and the impact that this had on the maximum allowable intervention price based on cost-effectiveness at the UK NICE willingness to pay threshold of £20,000 (US$ 25,913). Value of information analyses were conducted to explore the potential value of further research to resolve uncertainty at each uptake level. RESULTS: As uptake levels increase, the maximum allowable intervention price and overall expected value of removing decision uncertainty increases. For 5 percentage and 50 percentage points increase in uptake levels, the maximum allowable intervention price is £41.86 (US$ 54.23) and £418.59 (US$ 542.34) per person, and the overall expected value of removing decision uncertainty are £361,818,839 (US$ 468,786,625) and £1,468,712,316 (US$ 1,902,921,063) respectively. CONCLUSION: There is headroom for investment in interventions that improve uptake to the NDPP, thereby allowing the programme itself to be delivered in a manner that remains cost-effective.

Integrating Early Economic Evaluation into Target Product Profile development for medical tests: advantages and potential applications.

Target Product Profiles (TPPs) outline the characteristics that new health technologies require to address an unmet clinical need. To date, published TPPs for medical tests have focused on infectious diseases, mostly in the context of low- and middle-income countries. Recently, there have been calls for a broader use of TPPs as a mechanism to ensure that diagnostic innovation is aligned with clinical needs, yet the methodology underpinning TPP development remains suboptimal. Here, we propose that early economic evaluation (EEE) should be integrated within the TPP methodology to create a more rigorous framework for the development of "fit-for-purpose" tests. We discuss the potential benefits that EEE could bring to the core activities underpinning TPP development-scoping, drafting, consensus building, and updating-and argue that using EEE to help inform TPPs provides a more objective, evidence-based, and transparent approach to defining test specifications.

Modelling of hypothetical SARS-CoV-2 point of care tests for routine testing in residential care homes: rapid cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which at the time of writing (January 2021) was responsible for more than 2.25 million deaths worldwide and over 100,000 deaths in the UK. SARS-CoV-2 appears to be highly transmissible and could rapidly spread in residential care homes. OBJECTIVE: The work undertaken aimed to estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of viral detection point-of-care tests for detecting SARS-CoV-2 compared with laboratory-based tests in the setting of a hypothetical care home facility for elderly residents. PERSPECTIVE/SETTING: The perspective was that of the NHS in 2020. The setting was a hypothetical care home facility for elderly residents. Care homes with en suite rooms and with shared facilities were modelled separately. METHODS: A discrete event simulation model was constructed to model individual residents and simulate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 once it had entered the residential care facility. The numbers of COVID-19-related deaths and critical cases were recorded in addition to the number of days spent in isolation. Thirteen strategies involving different hypothetical SARS-CoV-2 tests were modelled. Recently published desirable and acceptable target product profiles for SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests and for hospital-based SARS-CoV-2 tests were modelled. Scenario analyses modelled early release from isolation based on receipt of a negative SARS-CoV-2 test result and the impact of vaccination. Incremental analyses were undertaken using both incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and net monetary benefits. RESULTS: Cost-effectiveness results depended on the proportion of residential care facilities penetrated by SARS-CoV-2. SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests with desirable target product profiles appear to have high net monetary benefit values. In contrast, SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests with acceptable target product profiles had low net monetary benefit values because of unnecessary isolations. The benefit of allowing early release from isolation depended on whether or not the facility had en suite rooms. The greater the assumed efficacy of vaccination, the lower the net monetary benefit values associated with SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests, when assuming that a vaccine lowers the risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2. LIMITATIONS: There is considerable uncertainty in the values for key parameters within the model, although calibration was undertaken in an attempt to mitigate this. Some degree of Monte Carlo sampling error persists because of the timelines of the project. The example care home simulated will also not match those of decision-makers deciding on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of introducing SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests. Given these limitations, the results should be taken as indicative rather than definitive, particularly the cost-effectiveness results when the relative cost per SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care test is uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests have considerable potential for benefit for use in residential care facilities, but whether or not this materialises depends on the diagnostic accuracy and costs of forthcoming SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests. FUTURE WORK: More accurate results would be obtained when there is more certainty on the diagnostic accuracy of and the reduction in time to test result associated with SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests when used in the context of residential care facilities, the proportion of care home penetrated by SARS-CoV-2 and the levels of immunity once vaccination is administered. These parameters are currently uncertain. FUNDING: This report was commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme as project number 132154. This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 39. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). SARS-CoV-2 is highly infectious, and this can cause problems in care homes, where the virus can spread quickly. Laboratory-based tests can determine whether or not someone has SARS-CoV-2, but these tests are not perfect and can take a long time to provide a result. Point-of-care tests that can be performed quickly in the care home to detect SARS-CoV-2 are being developed and they may have much shorter times to get a result than laboratory-based tests, although with worse accuracy. The benefit of quicker tests is that decisions to put residents into or release them from isolation can be made sooner, reducing the risk of spreading SARS-CoV-2 and reducing time in isolation. The disadvantage of reduced accuracy is that wrong decisions could be made, resulting in either unnecessary isolation or increased spread of SARS-CoV-2. A computer model was built to explore the impact of using SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests for residents of care homes. The model estimated the number of SARS-CoV-2 infections, deaths due to COVID-19 and days in isolation. Strategies were run using different values, including the time to get a test result back, the accuracy of tests, the proportion of care homes where there is a case of SARS-CoV-2, whether residents were isolated individually or in groups and how well vaccines work. The results of the model indicated that point-of-care tests could be good if there was a large decrease in the time to get a test result back, if accuracy was high and if vaccination protection was moderate. However, the accuracy and speed of future point-of-care tests is uncertain. When newer SARS-CoV-2 tests are available, the model will allow an estimate of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the tests to be made.

Modelling of hypothetical SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests on admission to hospital from A&E: rapid cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019. At the time of writing (October 2020), the number of cases of COVID-19 had been approaching 38 million and more than 1 million deaths were attributable to it. SARS-CoV-2 appears to be highly transmissible and could rapidly spread in hospital wards. OBJECTIVE: The work undertaken aimed to estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of viral detection point-of-care tests for detecting SARS-CoV-2 compared with laboratory-based tests. A further objective was to assess occupancy levels in hospital areas, such as waiting bays, before allocation to an appropriate bay. PERSPECTIVE/SETTING: The perspective was that of the UK NHS in 2020. The setting was a hypothetical hospital with an accident and emergency department. METHODS: An individual patient model was constructed that simulated the spread of disease and mortality within the hospital and recorded occupancy levels. Thirty-two strategies involving different hypothetical SARS-CoV-2 tests were modelled. Recently published desirable and acceptable target product profiles for SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests were modelled. Incremental analyses were undertaken using both incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and net monetary benefits, and key patient outcomes, such as death and intensive care unit care, caused directly by COVID-19 were recorded. RESULTS: A SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care test with a desirable target product profile appears to have a relatively small number of infections, a low occupancy level within the waiting bays, and a high net monetary benefit. However, if hospital laboratory testing can produce results in 6 hours, then the benefits of point-of-care tests may be reduced. The acceptable target product profiles performed less well and had lower net monetary benefits than both a laboratory-based test with a 24-hour turnaround time and strategies using data from currently available SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests. The desirable and acceptable point-of-care test target product profiles had lower requirement for patients to be in waiting bays before being allocated to an appropriate bay than laboratory-based tests, which may be of high importance in some hospitals. Tests that appeared more cost-effective also had better patient outcomes. LIMITATIONS: There is considerable uncertainty in the values for key parameters within the model, although calibration was undertaken in an attempt to mitigate this. The example hospital simulated will also not match those of decision-makers deciding on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of introducing SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests. Given these limitations, the results should be taken as indicative rather than definitive, particularly cost-effectiveness results when the relative cost per SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care test is uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: Should a SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care test with a desirable target product profile become available, this appears promising, particularly when the reduction on the requirements for waiting bays before allocation to a SARS-CoV-2-infected bay, or a non-SARS-CoV-2-infected bay, is considered. The results produced should be informative to decision-makers who can identify the results most pertinent to their specific circumstances. FUTURE WORK: More accurate results could be obtained when there is more certainty on the diagnostic accuracy of, and the reduction in time to test result associated with, SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests, and on the impact of these tests on occupancy of waiting bays and isolation bays. These parameters are currently uncertain. FUNDING: This report was commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme as project number 132154. This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 21. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). SARS-CoV-2 is highly infectious, and this can cause problems in hospitals, where the virus can spread quickly. Laboratory-based tests can determine whether or not a patient has SARS-CoV-2, but these tests are not perfect and can require a considerable time to provide a result. Point-of-care tests to detect SARS-CoV-2 are being developed that may have much shorter times to a test result, although these are likely to be less accurate than laboratory-based tests. The benefit of quicker tests is that a decision to put a patient in a SARS-CoV-2-infected bay or in a non-SARS-CoV-2-infected bay can be made sooner, limiting contact between patients with SARS-CoV-2 and patients without SARS-CoV-2 and reducing the risk of infection transmission. The disadvantage of reduced accuracy is that some patients may be allocated to the wrong bay, increasing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. A computer model was built to explore the impact of using SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests for people admitted to hospital. This model estimated the number of infections and deaths due to COVID-19, the costs of testing, and the number of people waiting to be put in an appropriate bay. Strategies were run using different values, including the time to get a test result, the accuracy of tests and whether or not staff who do not have symptoms should be tested. The results of the model indicated that point-of-care tests could be good if there was a large reduction in the time to get a test result and if accuracy was high. However, it is not certain whether or not such tests will become available. When newer SARS-CoV-2 tests are available, the model will allow an estimate of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the test to be made.

Target Product Profiles for medical tests: a systematic review of current methods.

BACKGROUND: A Target Product Profile (TPP) outlines the necessary characteristics of an innovative product to address an unmet clinical need. TPPs could be used to better guide manufacturers in the development of 'fit for purpose' tests, thus increasing the likelihood that novel tests will progress from bench to bedside. However, there is currently no guidance on how to produce a TPP specifically for medical tests. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to summarise the methods currently used to develop TPPs for medical tests, the sources used to inform these recommendations and the test characteristics for which targets are made. Database and website searches were conducted in November 2018. TPPs written in English for any medical test were included. Based on an existing framework, test characteristics were clustered into commonly recognised themes. RESULTS: Forty-four TPPs were identified, all of which focused on diagnostic tests for infectious diseases. Three core decision-making phases for developing TPPs were identified: scoping, drafting and consensus-building. Consultations with experts and the literature mostly informed the scoping and drafting of TPPs. All TPPs provided information on unmet clinical need and desirable analytical performance, and the majority specified clinical validity characteristics. Few TPPs described specifications for clinical utility, and none included cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified a commonly used framework that could be beneficial for anyone interested in drafting a TPP for a medical test. Currently, key outcomes such as utility and cost-effectiveness are largely overlooked within TPPs though and we foresee this as an area for further improvement.

UK Multicenter Prospective Evaluation of the Leibovich Score in Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma: Performance has Altered Over Time.

OBJECTIVE: To examine changes in outcome by the Leibovich score using contemporary and historic cohorts of patients presenting with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective observational multicenter cohort study, recruiting patients with suspected newly diagnosed RCC. A historical cohort of patients was examined for comparison. Metastasis-free survival (MFS) formed the primary outcome measure. Model discrimination and calibration were evaluated using Cox proportional hazard regression and the Kaplan-Meier method. Overall performance of the Leibovich model was assessed by estimating explained variation. RESULTS: Seven hundred and six patients were recruited between 2011 and 2014 and RCC confirmed in 608 (86%) patients. Application of the Leibovich score to patients with localized clear cell RCC in this contemporary cohort demonstrated good model discrimination (c-index = 0.77) but suboptimal calibration, with improved MFS for intermediate- and high-risk patients (5-year MFS 85% and 50%, respectively) compared to the original Leibovich cohort (74% and 31%) and a historic (1998-2006) UK cohort (76% and 37%). The proportion of variation in outcome explained by the model is low and has declined over time (28% historic vs 22% contemporary UK cohort). CONCLUSION: Prognostic models are widely employed in patients with localized RCC to guide surveillance intensity and clinical trial selection. However, the majority of the variation in outcome remains unexplained by the Leibovich model and, over time, MFS rates among intermediate- and high-risk classified patients have altered. These findings are likely to have implications for all such models used in this setting.

Evaluating diagnostic strategies for early detection of cancer: the CanTest framework.

BACKGROUND: Novel diagnostic triage and testing strategies to support early detection of cancer could improve clinical outcomes. Most apparently promising diagnostic tests ultimately fail because of inadequate performance in real-world, low prevalence populations such as primary care or general community populations. They should therefore be systematically evaluated before implementation to determine whether they lead to earlier detection, are cost-effective, and improve patient safety and quality of care, while minimising over-investigation and over-diagnosis. METHODS: We performed a systematic scoping review of frameworks for the evaluation of tests and diagnostic approaches. RESULTS: We identified 16 frameworks: none addressed the entire continuum from test development to impact on diagnosis and patient outcomes in the intended population, nor the way in which tests may be used for triage purposes as part of a wider diagnostic strategy. Informed by these findings, we developed a new framework, the 'CanTest Framework', which proposes five iterative research phases forming a clear translational pathway from new test development to health system implementation and evaluation. CONCLUSION: This framework is suitable for testing in low prevalence populations, where tests are often applied for triage testing and incorporated into a wider diagnostic strategy. It has relevance for a wide range of stakeholders including patients, policymakers, purchasers, healthcare providers and industry.

Point of care creatinine testing in diagnostic imaging: A feasibility study within the outpatient computed tomography setting.

INTRODUCTION: Although the risks associated with iodinated contrast administration are acknowledged to be very low, screening of kidney function prior to administration is still standard practice in many hospitals. This study has evaluated the feasibility of implementing a screening form in conjunction with point of care (PoC) creatinine testing as a method to manage the risks of post contrast acute kidney injury (PC-AKI) within the CT imaging pathway. METHOD: Over an eight-week period 300 adult outpatients attending a UK CT department for contrast-enhanced scans were approached. Participants completed a screening questionnaire for co-morbidities linked to kidney dysfunction and consented to have a PoC and laboratory creatinine tests. Comparison was made against with previous baseline blood tests obtained within the preceding 3 months, as required by the study site. Participants were also invited to attend for follow up PoC and laboratory bloods tests at 48-72 h. RESULTS: 14 patients (4.7%) had a scan-day eGFR below 45mL/min/1.73m2, all identified through screening. The majority of patients (n=281/300; 93.7%) fell in the same risk category based on previous and scan-day blood results. Six PoC test failures were recorded on the scan day. The constant error between the Abbott i-STAT PoC scan-day measurements and the laboratory scan-day measurements was -3.71 (95% CI: -6.41 to -0.50). Five patients had an elevated creatinine (≥25% from baseline) post contrast administration, but no instances of PC-AKI (≥50% from baseline) were identified. CONCLUSION: PoC creatinine testing is a practical method of ensuring renal function and is feasible in the radiology environment.

European multicentre study validates enhanced liver fibrosis test as biomarker of fibrosis in systemic sclerosis.

Objectives: To validate enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test and its components-amino-terminal propeptide of procollagen type III (PIIINP), tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase-1 (TIMP-1) and HA-as biomarkers of fibrosis in SSc in an independent, international, multicentre cohort. Methods: Two hundred and fifty-four SSc patients from six Rheumatology Centres were included. Sera were collected and stored according to EUSTAR biobanking recommendations and analysed through automated high throughput diagnostics. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS software. Results: Two hundred and forty-seven SSc patients (mean age 55.7 ± 13.9 years, 202 F) were analysed. ELF score, TIMP-1 and PIIINP levels were higher in males (P = 0.0197, P = 0.0107, P = 0.0108 respectively) and in dcSSc (P = 0.001, P = 0.0008, P < 0.0001 respectively). ELF score and the single markers significantly correlated with modified Rodnan skin score (r = 0.37, P < 0.0001), disease activity and severity (P < 0.0001 for all markers, except for HA P = 0.0001) and inversely with forced vital capacity, (FVC) % (TIMP-1, r = -0.21, P = 0.0012; PIIINP, r = -0.26, P = 0.0001), TLC% (ELF score, r = -0.20, P = 0.0036; TIMP-1, r = -0.32, P < 0.0001; PIIINP, r = -0.28, P < 0.0001), diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) % (P < 0.0001 for all markers, except for HA P = 0.0115). Multivariate analysis indicated that age (P < 0.001), modified Rodnan skin score (P < 0.001) and DLCO% (P = 0.005) were independently associated with ELF score. Conclusion: Between the first and this validation studies, the value of the ELF score as independent marker of skin and lung involvement in SSc is confirmed in 457 patients. A longitudinal study is on-going to identify an SSc specific algorithm with predictive value for skin and lung progression.

The future for diagnostic tests of acute kidney injury in critical care: evidence synthesis, care pathway analysis and research prioritisation.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is highly prevalent in hospital inpatient populations, leading to significant mortality and morbidity, reduced quality of life and high short- and long-term health-care costs for the NHS. New diagnostic tests may offer an earlier diagnosis or improved care, but evidence of benefit to patients and of value to the NHS is required before national adoption. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the potential for AKI in vitro diagnostic tests to enhance the NHS care of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and identify an efficient supporting research strategy. DATA SOURCES: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, The Cochrane Library databases, Embase, Health Management Information Consortium, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, MEDLINE, metaRegister of Current Controlled Trials, PubMed and Web of Science databases from their inception dates until September 2014 (review 1), November 2015 (review 2) and July 2015 (economic model). Details of databases used for each review and coverage dates are listed in the main report. REVIEW METHODS: The AKI-Diagnostics project included horizon scanning, systematic reviewing, meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity, appraisal of analytical validity, care pathway analysis, model-based lifetime economic evaluation from a UK NHS perspective and value of information (VOI) analysis. RESULTS: The horizon-scanning search identified 152 potential tests and biomarkers. Three tests, Nephrocheck® (Astute Medical, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA), NGAL and cystatin C, were subjected to detailed review. The meta-analysis was limited by variable reporting standards, study quality and heterogeneity, but sensitivity was between 0.54 and 0.92 and specificity was between 0.49 and 0.95 depending on the test. A bespoke critical appraisal framework demonstrated that analytical validity was also poorly reported in many instances. In the economic model the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from £11,476 to £19,324 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), with a probability of cost-effectiveness between 48% and 54% when tests were compared with current standard care. LIMITATIONS: The major limitation in the evidence on tests was the heterogeneity between studies in the definitions of AKI and the timing of testing. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic tests for AKI in the ICU offer the potential to improve patient care and add value to the NHS, but cost-effectiveness remains highly uncertain. Further research should focus on the mechanisms by which a new test might change current care processes in the ICU and the subsequent cost and QALY implications. The VOI analysis suggested that further observational research to better define the prevalence of AKI developing in the ICU would be worthwhile. A formal randomised controlled trial of biomarker use linked to a standardised AKI care pathway is necessary to provide definitive evidence on whether or not adoption of tests by the NHS would be of value. STUDY REGISTRATION: The systematic review within this study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013919. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Point-of-care creatinine testing for kidney function measurement prior to contrast-enhanced diagnostic imaging: evaluation of the performance of three systems for clinical utility.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) can occur rarely in patients exposed to iodinated contrast and result in contrast-induced AKI (CI-AKI). A key risk factor is the presence of preexisting chronic kidney disease (CKD); therefore, it is important to assess patient risk and obtain kidney function measurement prior to administration. Point-of-care (PoC) testing provides an alternative strategy but there remains uncertainty, with respect to diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility. METHODS: A device study compared three PoC analysers (Nova StatSensor, Abbott i-STAT and Radiometer ABL800 FLEX) with a reference laboratory standard (Roche Cobas 8000 series, enzymatic creatinine). Three hundred adult patients attending a UK hospital phlebotomy department were recruited to have additional blood samples for analysis on the PoC devices. RESULTS: The ABL800 FLEX had the strongest concordance with laboratory measured serum creatinine (mean bias=-0.86, 95% limits of agreement=-9.6 to 7.9) followed by the i-STAT (average bias=3.88, 95% limits of agreement=-8.8 to 16.6) and StatSensor (average bias=3.56, 95% limits of agreement=-27.7 to 34.8). In risk classification, the ABL800 FLEX and i-STAT identified all patients with an eGFR≤30, whereas the StatSensor resulted in a small number of missed high-risk cases (n=4/13) and also operated outside of the established performance goals. CONCLUSIONS: The screening of patients at risk of CI-AKI may be feasible with PoC technology. However, in this study, it was identified that the analyser concordance with the laboratory reference varies. It is proposed that further research exploring PoC implementation in imaging department pathways is needed.

The evidence base for circulating tumour DNA blood-based biomarkers for the early detection of cancer: a systematic mapping review.

BACKGROUND: The presence of circulating cell-free DNA from tumours in blood (ctDNA) is of major importance to those interested in early cancer detection, as well as to those wishing to monitor tumour progression or diagnose the presence of activating mutations to guide treatment. In 2014, the UK Early Cancer Detection Consortium undertook a systematic mapping review of the literature to identify blood-based biomarkers with potential for the development of a non-invasive blood test for cancer screening, and which identified this as a major area of interest. This review builds on the mapping review to expand the ctDNA dataset to examine the best options for the detection of multiple cancer types. METHODS: The original mapping review was based on comprehensive searches of the electronic databases Medline, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane library, and Biosis to obtain relevant literature on blood-based biomarkers for cancer detection in humans (PROSPERO no. CRD42014010827). The abstracts for each paper were reviewed to determine whether validation data were reported, and then examined in full. Publications concentrating on monitoring of disease burden or mutations were excluded. RESULTS: The search identified 94 ctDNA studies meeting the criteria for review. All but 5 studies examined one cancer type, with breast, colorectal and lung cancers representing 60% of studies. The size and design of the studies varied widely. Controls were included in 77% of publications. The largest study included 640 patients, but the median study size was 65 cases and 35 controls, and the bulk of studies (71%) included less than 100 patients. Studies either estimated cfDNA levels non-specifically or tested for cancer-specific mutations or methylation changes (the majority using PCR-based methods). CONCLUSION: We have systematically reviewed ctDNA blood biomarkers for the early detection of cancer. Pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical considerations were identified which need to be addressed before such biomarkers enter clinical practice. The value of small studies with no comparison between methods, or even the inclusion of controls is highly questionable, and larger validation studies will be required before such methods can be considered for early cancer detection.

RIPOSTE: a framework for improving the design and analysis of laboratory-based research.

Lack of reproducibility is an ongoing problem in some areas of the biomedical sciences. Poor experimental design and a failure to engage with experienced statisticians at key stages in the design and analysis of experiments are two factors that contribute to this problem. The RIPOSTE (Reducing IrreProducibility in labOratory STudiEs) framework has been developed to support early and regular discussions between scientists and statisticians in order to improve the design, conduct and analysis of laboratory studies and, therefore, to reduce irreproducibility. This framework is intended for use during the early stages of a research project, when specific questions or hypotheses are proposed. The essential points within the framework are explained and illustrated using three examples (a medical equipment test, a macrophage study and a gene expression study). Sound study design minimises the possibility of bias being introduced into experiments and leads to higher quality research with more reproducible results.

Predicting response to bevacizumab in ovarian cancer: a panel of potential biomarkers informing treatment selection.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to identify and validate novel predictive and/or prognostic serum proteomic biomarkers in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) treated as part of the phase III international ICON7 clinical trial. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: ICON7 was a phase III international trial in EOC which showed a modest but statistically significant benefit in progression-free survival (PFS) with the addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy. Serum samples from 10 patients who received bevacizumab (five responders and five nonresponders) were analyzed by mass spectrometry to identify candidate biomarkers. Initial validation and exploration by immunoassay was undertaken in an independent cohort of 92 patients, followed by a second independent cohort of 115 patients (taken from across both arms of the trial). RESULTS: Three candidate biomarkers were identified: mesothelin, fms-like tyrosine kinase-4 (FLT4), and α1-acid glycoprotein (AGP). Each showed evidence of independent prognostic potential when adjusting for high-risk status in initial (P < 0.02) and combined (P < 0.01) validation cohorts. In cohort I, individual biomarkers were not predictive of bevacizumab benefit; however, when combined with CA-125, a signature was developed that was predictive of bevacizumab response and discriminated benefit attributable to bevacizumab better than clinical characteristics. The signature showed weaker evidence of predictive ability in validation cohort II, but was still strongly predictive considering all samples (P = 0.001), with an improvement in median PFS of 5.5 months in signature-positive patients in the experimental arm compared with standard arm. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a discriminatory signature comprising mesothelin, FLT4, AGP, and CA-125 as potentially identifying those patients with EOC more likely to benefit from bevacizumab. These results require validation in further patient cohorts.

Serum aminoacylase-1 is a novel biomarker with potential prognostic utility for long-term outcome in patients with delayed graft function following renal transplantation.

Early identification and prognostic stratification of delayed graft function following renal transplantation has significant potential to improve outcome. Mass spectrometry analysis of serum samples, before and on day 2 post transplant from five patients with delayed graft function and five with an uncomplicated transplant, identified aminoacylase-1 (ACY-1) as a potential outcome biomarker. Following assay development, analysis of longitudinal samples from an initial validation cohort of 55 patients confirmed that the ACY-1 level on day 1 or 2 was a moderate predictor of delayed graft function, similar to serum creatinine, complementing the strongest predictor cystatin C. A further validation cohort of 194 patients confirmed this association with area under ROC curves (95% CI) for day 1 serum (138 patients) of 0.74 (0.67-0.85) for ACY-1, 0.9 (0.84-0.95) for cystatin C, and 0.93 (0.88-0.97) for both combined. Significant differences in serum ACY-1 levels were apparent between delayed, slow, and immediate graft function. Analysis of long-term follow-up for 54 patients with delayed graft function showed a highly significant association between day 1 or 3 serum ACY-1 and dialysis-free survival, mainly associated with the donor-brain-dead transplant type. Thus, proteomic analysis provides novel insights into the potential clinical utility of serum ACY-1 levels immediately post transplantation, enabling subdivision of patients with delayed graft function in terms of long-term outcome. Our study requires independent confirmation.

A comparison of the analytical performance of five commercially available assays for neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin using urine.

BACKGROUND: Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) is a promising biomarker for acute kidney injury that is beginning to be used in clinical practice in addition to research studies. The current study describes an independent validation and comparison of five commercially available NGAL assays, focusing on urine samples. This is an essential step in the translation of this marker to clinical use in terms of allowing valid inter-study comparison and generation of robust results. METHODS: Two CE (Conformité Européenne)-marked assays, the NGAL Test (BioPorto) on Siemens ADVIA(®) 1800 and the ARCHITECT Urine NGAL assay on i2000SR (Abbott Laboratories), and three research-use-only (RUO) ELISAs (R&D Systems, Hycult and BioPorto) were evaluated. Imprecision, parallelism, recovery, selectivity, limit of quantitation (LOQ), vulnerability to interference and hook effect were assessed and inter-assay agreement was determined using 68 urine samples from patients with various renal diseases and healthy controls. RESULTS: The Abbott and R&D Systems assays demonstrated satisfactory performance for all parameters tested. However for the other three assays evaluated, problems were identified with LOQ (BioPorto/ADVIA(®)), parallelism (BioPorto ELISA) or several parameters (Hycult). Between-method agreement varied with the Hycult assay in particular being markedly different and highlighting issues with standardization and form of NGAL measured. CONCLUSIONS: Variability exists between the five NGAL assays in terms of their performance and this should be taken into account when interpreting results from the various clinical or research studies measuring urinary NGAL.

Measuring carbonic anhydrase IX as a hypoxia biomarker: differences in concentrations in serum and plasma using a commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay due to influences of metal ions.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in measuring the soluble forms of carbonic anhydrase IX (CA IX) in blood as a marker of hypoxia for prognostic purposes or for predictive use in therapeutic trials in various cancers. Following our initial observations of marked differences in the measured concentrations of CA IX in EDTA plasma versus serum, we sought to investigate these further in order to determine their effects on results in published studies and to ensure accurate measurement in future studies. METHODS: Serum and EDTA plasma samples from healthy controls and patients with renal cancer were used in the validation of two commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) for CA IX with examination of recovery, parallelism and specificity and comparison of paired plasma and serum. RESULTS: Successful validation of one of the ELISAs was not achieved with particular problems with parallelism and marked differences in measured CA IX concentrations between EDTA plasma and serum. This appeared to be due to a metal ion-dependent epitope on CA IX recognized by the detection antibody in this assay. The other commercially available ELISA examined was successfully validated and showed no difference in CA IX between EDTA plasma and serum. CONCLUSIONS: These results have important consequences for published studies using this assay where the conclusions drawn from the measurements made may be invalid. This study highlights the need for stringent validation of commercially available assays, including examination of various sample types, before use in research studies.