Harmonization status of procalcitonin measurements: what do comparison studies and EQA schemes tell us?

Sepsis represents a global health priority because of its high mortality and morbidity. The key to improving prognosis remains an early diagnosis to initiate appropriate antibiotic treatment. Procalcitonin (PCT) is a recognized biomarker for the early indication of bacterial infections and a valuable tool to guide and individualize antibiotic treatment. To meet the increasing demand for PCT testing, numerous PCT immunoassays have been developed and commercialized, but results have been questioned. Many comparison studies have been carried out to evaluate analytical performance and comparability of results provided by the different commercially available immunoassays for PCT, but results are conflicting. External Quality Assessment Schemes (EQAS) for PCT constitute another way to evaluate results comparability. However, when making this comparison, it must be taken into account that the variety of EQA materials consist of different matrices, the commutability of which has not yet been investigated. The present study gathers results from all published comparison studies and results from 137 EQAS surveys to describe the current state-of-the-art harmonization of PCT results. Comparison studies globally highlight a significant variability of measurement results that nonetheless seem to have a moderate impact on medical decision-making. For their part, EQAS for PCT provides highly discrepant estimates of the interlaboratory CV. Due to differences in commutability of the EQA materials, the results from different peer groups could not be compared. To improve the informative value of the EQA data, the existing limitations such as non-harmonized conditions and suboptimal and/or unknown commutability of the EQA materials have to be overcome. The study highlights the need for commutable reference materials that could be used to properly evaluate result comparability and possibly standardize calibration, if necessary. Such an initiative would further improve the safe use of PCT in clinical routine.

Uncertainty in measurement for 43 biochemistry, immunoassay, and hemostasis routine analytes evaluated by a method using only external quality assessment data.

BACKGROUND: International organizations require from medical laboratories a quantitative statement of the uncertainty in measurement (UM) to help interpret patient results. The French accreditation body (COFRAC) recommends an approach (SH GTA 14 IQC/EQA method) using both internal quality control (IQC) and external quality assessment (EQA) data. The aim of this work was to validate an alternative way to quantify UM using only EQA results without any need for IQC data. This simple and practical method, which has already been described as the long-term evaluation of the UM (LTUM), is based on linear regression between data obtained by participants in EQA schemes and target values. We used it for 43 routine analytes covering biochemistry, immunoassay, and hemostasis fields. METHODS: Data from 50 laboratories participating in ProBioQual (PBQ) EQA schemes over 25 months were used to obtain estimates of the median and 90th percentile LTUM and to compare them to the usual analytical goals. Then, the two UM estimation methods were compared using data from 20 laboratories participating in both IQC and EQA schemes. RESULTS: Median LTUMs ranged from 2.9% (sodium) to 16.3% (bicarbonates) for biochemistry analytes, from 12.6% (prothrombin time) to 18.4% (factor V) for hemostasis analytes when using the mean of all participants, and were around 10% for immunoassays when using the peer-group mean. Median LTUMs were, in most cases, slightly lower than those obtained with the SH GTA 14 method, whatever the concentration level. CONCLUSIONS: LTUM is a simple and convenient method that gives UM estimates that are reliable and comparable to those of recommended methods. Therefore, proficiency testing (PT) organizers are allowed to provide participants with an additional UM estimate using only EQA data and which could be updated at the end of each survey.

Including osteoprotegerin and collagen IV in a score-based blood test for liver fibrosis increases diagnostic accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive methods for liver fibrosis evaluation in chronic liver diseases have been recently developed, i.e. transient elastography (Fibroscan™) and blood tests (Fibrometer®, Fibrotest®, and Hepascore®). In this study, we aimed to design a new score in chronic hepatitis C (CHC) by selecting blood markers in a large panel and we compared its diagnostic performance with those of other noninvasive methods. METHODS: Sixteen blood tests were performed in 306 untreated CHC patients included in a multicenter prospective study (ANRS HC EP 23 Fibrostar) using METAVIR histological fibrosis stage as reference. The new score was constructed by non linear regression using the most accurate biomarkers. RESULTS: Five markers (alpha-2-macroglobulin, apolipoprotein-A1, AST, collagen IV and osteoprotegerin) were included in the new function called Coopscore©. Using the Obuchowski Index, Coopscore© shows higher diagnostic performances than for Fibrometer®, Fibrotest®, Hepascore® and Fibroscan™ in CHC. Association between Fibroscan™ and Coopscore© might avoid 68% of liver biopsies for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis. CONCLUSION: Coopscore© provides higher accuracy than other noninvasive methods for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis in CHC. The association of Coopscore© with Fibroscan™ increases its predictive value.