Robust Response of the Clinical Laboratory to the COVID-19 Pandemic despite Significant Challenges.

BACKGROUND: Clinical laboratories immediately provided rapid, reliable, and high-throughout diagnostic testing for COVID-19, which was an essential component in combating the pandemic. As the pandemic evolved, the clinical laboratory was faced with additional challenges. However, there are limited studies on the impact of the pandemic on the clinical laboratory over the past 3 years. METHODS: The American Association for Clinical Chemistry (AACC) sent 8 surveys over a 32-month time period to international clinical laboratory leadership asking questions about COVID-19 testing, supplies, staffing, and lessons learned. RESULTS: There were a total of 191 unique respondents: 133 laboratories in the US and 58 laboratories from 37 other countries participated. By May 2020, more than 70% of laboratories offered COVID-19 diagnostic testing with average turnaround times ranging from 1 to 24 h. Daily COVID-19 testing volumes peaked in January of 2022 at a median of 775 tests per day. Throughout the pandemic, supplies and staffing concerns increased. In most of the 8 surveys, 55% to 65% of laboratories reported they were unable to obtain supplies. Obtaining reagents and test kits was the most problematic. Staffing challenges continue to be a significant concern and most laboratories have struggled hiring testing personnel. CONCLUSIONS: Survey results were utilized to demonstrate the impact of the pandemic on the clinical laboratory community, and importantly, findings were presented to the White House Coronavirus Taskforce. Overall, the clinical laboratories had a robust response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and despite ongoing and evolving challenges, continue to provide rapid diagnostic testing.

Laboratory-Developed Tests Account for a Small Minority of Tests Ordered in an Academic Hospital System.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency of use of laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) in an academic medical center system. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 2021 test order data from an academic medical center (hospital, outpatient clinics, and cancer center) was done. Measures included assay type, assay methodology, regulatory status, test order volume, inpatient vs outpatient setting, and provider medical specialty. RESULTS: Of the 3,016,928 tests ordered in 2021, 2,831,489 (93.9%) were tests cleared, approved, and/or authorized by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA); 116,583 (3.9%) were LDTs; and 68,856 (2.3%) were standard methods. These test orders were performed using a total of 1,954 distinct assays. Of these, 983 (50.3%) were FDA assays, 880 (45.0%) were LDTs, and 91 (4.7%) were standard methods. Laboratory-developed tests were more commonly ordered in the outpatient vs inpatient setting and represented a higher proportion of the test volume at the cancer center compared with the university hospital (5.6% vs 3.6%, respectively). The top 167 LDT assays accounted for 90% of the LDT volume (104,996 orders). Among the 20 most frequently ordered LDTs were mass spectrometry assays and tests used in the care of immunocompromised patients. Internal/family medicine placed the greatest number of orders (1,044,642) and ordered one of the lowest proportions of LDTs (3.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Laboratory-developed tests made up a small percentage of the total laboratory tests ordered within the academic health system studied.

Reported Awareness and Adoption of 2021 Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate Equations Among US Clinical Laboratories, March 2022.

This study includes clinical laboratories that participated in the first general chemistry proficiency testing survey in 2022 to assess awareness and adoption of new equations from the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) that eliminated race-adjustment factors, including one based on creatinine and one based on creatinine and cystatin C.

Impact of Unconjugated estriol (uE3) assay interference on prenatal screening tests.

BACKGROUND: Unconjugated estriol (uE3) is an important biomarker in second trimester prenatal screening. Previous studies from our laboratory identified rare interference in the Beckman uE3 assay due to anti-ALP antibodies, which could be mitigated with a scavenger or heat-inactivated ALP (hALP). In the current study, 160 de-identified patient samples previously submitted for the Quad screen with low uE3 multiples of the median (MoM ≤0.50) were investigated for potential interference. METHODS: A reagent pack spiking strategy with hALP was employed to understand if the interference could be identified and mitigated in a scalable manner. The 160 samples were measured using uE3 lot #920861 previously known to be subject to interference, lot #920861 spiked with hALP, and the vendor reformulated lot #922579. Samples were suspected to have interference if the percent difference in uE3 measurements was >50%. Pseudo-risks were calculated using a test patient environment to understand the screening impact due to the change in uE3 result. RESULTS: Seventeen of the 160 samples had uE3 results that were >50% different between the hALP spiked and non-spiked reagent pack. Both original lot #920861 with hALP and reformulated lot #922579 identified the same 17 patients as having interference in lot #920861. Analysis of screening risks using a test patient environment showed that assay interference could result in false positives for one trisomy 21 and three trisomy 18 post-test risk calculations. CONCLUSION: Our experiment of reagent pack spiking with hALP produced similar uE3 results to a reformulated reagent designed to address potential interference, demonstrating that this is a feasible strategy to screen for interference in a scalable manner. The vendor-provided reformulation addressed anti-ALP interference and improved the performance of the screen.

Evaluation of an adenosine deaminase (ADA) assay in serum, pleural, pericardial, peritoneal, and cerebrospinal fluids on the Roche cobas c501 analyzer.

OBJECTIVES: Adenosine deaminase (ADA) can be increased in various body fluids during infectious and inflammatory states. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance characteristics of the Diazyme ADA assay for serum, pleural, pericardial, peritoneal, and cerebrospinal fluids using the Roche cobas c501 analyzer. METHODS: Accuracy, linearity, recovery, precision, sensitivity, specificity, reference interval, and stability studies were conducted. Potential interference of hyaluronidase and ultracentrifugation pre-treatment for viscosity on ADA concentrations were further evaluated. RESULTS: Assay method comparison to two separate external laboratories showed the following results (slope, intercept, %bias): serum (1.053, -0.478, 4.4 %); pleural (1.046, -1.41, 2.6 %). Accuracy (109.6 % recovery) was further demonstrated using a commercially available ADA reference material (BCR647). Linearity and spiked recovery studies showed percent recoveries ranging 94.3-109.3 %. Precision across all specimen types was ≤4.7 %CV. Interference was observed with increasing concentrations of various sources of conjugated and unconjugated bilirubin. Reference intervals were established for serum and pleural fluids, and previously published reference intervals were verified for pericardial, peritoneal, and cerebrospinal fluids. All specimen types were stable for 24 h ambient (8-25 °C), 1 week refrigerated (2-8 °C), and 1 month frozen (-20 °C). Of the two types of hyaluronidase evaluated, one showed positive interference for ADA (Sigma-Aldrich, H3506; 4.59 to 17.90 average % difference from baseline). Ultracentrifugation did not interfere with results (-2.32 to 0.87 average % difference from baseline). CONCLUSIONS: The Diazyme ADA assay was validated for use in our laboratory for all fluid types evaluated. Interference was observed with increasing concentrations of bilirubin and one source of hyaluronidase.

Comparison of two chromogranin A assays and investigation of nonlinear specimens.

Background: As a marker for functional and non-functional neuroendocrine tumors, serum chromogranin A (CgA) concentrations have shown value for detecting and monitoring disease. Here we describe a comparison between an established micro-titer plate assay (Cisbio CgA ELISA) and an analyzer-based assay (B·R·A·H·M·S CgA II KRYPTOR). Reference limits were established along with a performance evaluation of the KRYPTOR assay. Nonlinearity observed in approximately 0.03% of patients was also investigated. Methods: Samples were tested according to kit manufacturer's protocols. Reference limits were established for both assays testing the same cohort of healthy volunteers. Potential causes of nonlinearity investigated were HAMA, macromolecule effects and elevated serum creatinine. Results: KRYPTOR vs. Cisbio: slope=0.692, y-intercept=-40.0 (r2=0.967, n=186). Upper reference limits were 160 and 103 ng/mL for the Cisbio and KRYPTOR assays, respectively. Linearity: slope=1.012 (r2=0.998) with 95.0-105.5% recoveries. Precision: repeatability ≤2.4%, within-laboratory ≤3.1% (79 and 738 ng/mL). Limit of detection: 8 ng/mL. Strong nonlinear specimens (n=6) retested for HAMA interference generated differences (block-no block) ranging -3.2-4.2%. Polyethylene glycol precipitation recoveries ranged from 157 to >5714% for affected specimens versus 71-79% for normal specimens. Eight of 14 nonlinear specimens (57%) had elevated serum creatinine results (>1.20 mg/dL). Conclusions: The CgA II KRYPTOR assay performs acceptably for quantifying CgA in human serum. While adequate correlation is observed against the Cisbio ELISA, there is significant disagreement overall. Efforts to identify a cause of the nonlinearity observed in a small percentage of patients were inconclusive, but neither HAMA interference, macromolecule effects nor renal failure appear as major factors.

An International Survey of Glucose-6-Phosphate Dehydrogenase Laboratory Reporting Practices: Implications for Tafenoquine Eligibility Assessment.

CONTEXT.­: Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) activity is used in the evaluation of hemolysis risk in patients being assessed for G6PD deficiency. A long-acting 8-aminoquinoline drug (tafenoquine) used in malaria treatment is contraindicated in patients with G6PD deficiency (<70% normal G6PD activity). The current state of G6PD reporting practices to support clinical eligibility assessment is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE.­: To assess clinical laboratory reporting practices for G6PD testing. DESIGN.­: In October 2019 and October 2020, voluntary questionnaires were distributed to 327 and 324 laboratories participating in the College of American Pathologists G6PD proficiency testing (PT). RESULTS.­: Two hundred fifty-seven and 119 laboratories responded to the 2019 and 2020 questionnaires, respectively. Few laboratories have received clinical questions about average normal G6PD activity (US/Canada, 2.0% [3 of 149]; international, 8.4% [9 of 107]), whereas slightly more have determined the average normal G6PD activity for their own assay and patient populations (US/Canada, 6.7% [10 of 149]; international, 19.4% [21 of 108]). Few laboratories report G6PD activity in percent of normal format (US/Canada, 2.7% [4 of 149]; international, 8.3% [9 of 108]). The most common unit of measurement in use for quantitative G6PD reporting is unit per gram of hemoglobin. Reference intervals vary based on assay, reaction temperature, and participant laboratory and demonstrate moderate correlation (r = .46-.51) to G6PD activity measured from a "normal" PT challenge specimen. Nearly half of participants (47.8% [85 of 178]) categorized a quantitatively "intermediate" G6PD PT challenge as "normal" when using qualitative assays. CONCLUSIONS.­: Percent of normal G6PD activity reporting would facilitate patient eligibility assessment for drugs, such as tafenoquine. Quantitative assays are better able to differentiate "intermediate" specimens than qualitative assays.

An International Survey of Glucose-6-Phosphate Dehydrogenase Laboratory Reporting Practices.

CONTEXT.­: Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) activity is used in the evaluation of hemolysis risk in patients being assessed for G6PD deficiency. A long-acting 8-aminoquinoline drug (tafenoquine) used in malaria treatment is contraindicated in patients with G6PD deficiency (<70% normal G6PD activity). The current state of G6PD reporting practices to support clinical eligibility assessment is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE.­: To assess clinical laboratory reporting practices for G6PD testing. DESIGN.­: In October 2019 and October 2020, voluntary questionnaires were distributed to 327 and 324 laboratories participating in the College of American Pathologists G6PD proficiency testing (PT). RESULTS.­: Two hundred fifty-seven and 119 laboratories responded to the 2019 and 2020 questionnaires, respectively. Few laboratories have received clinical questions about average normal G6PD activity (US/Canada, 2.0% [3 of 149]; international, 8.4% [9 of 107]), whereas slightly more have determined the average normal G6PD activity for their own assay and patient populations (US/Canada, 6.7% [10 of 149]; international, 19.4% [21 of 108]). Few laboratories report G6PD activity in percent of normal format (US/Canada, 2.7% [4 of 149]; international, 8.3% [9 of 108]). The most common unit of measurement in use for quantitative G6PD reporting is unit per gram of hemoglobin. Reference intervals vary based on assay, reaction temperature, and participant laboratory and demonstrate moderate correlation (r = .46-.51) to G6PD activity measured from a "normal" PT challenge specimen. Nearly half of participants (47.8% [85 of 178]) categorized a quantitatively "intermediate" G6PD PT challenge as "normal" when using qualitative assays. CONCLUSIONS.­: Percent of normal G6PD activity reporting would facilitate patient eligibility assessment for drugs, such as tafenoquine. Quantitative assays are better able to differentiate "intermediate" specimens than qualitative assays.

Tobacco and Cannabis Use During Pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES: Nicotine (NIC) use during pregnancy can influence markers used in biochemical maternal serum screening. This study was designed to determine prevalence of disclosed tobacco smokers in our patient population and to compare disclosed tobacco smoking status with the presence of serum nicotine and a common tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) metabolite. METHODS: A deidentified dataset of disclosed smoking status for quadruple (Quad) screens was obtained. Residual serum submitted for Quad screens was obtained from frozen storage and analyzed for NIC and THC metabolites. RESULTS: Of specimens that had corresponding responses to the smoking history question on the patient history form, 7.2% (n = 1,783 of 24,611) specified that the patient was a tobacco smoker. Of the 271 specimens biochemically analyzed for NIC and THC metabolites, disclosed tobacco smokers had the highest prevalence of detectable NIC and THC metabolites. THC product use was most prevalent in patients categorized as probable tobacco smokers based on cotinine concentrations, as well as in younger patients. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence and concentration of NIC and THC metabolites vary based on disclosed tobacco smoker status. Biochemical testing may increase sensitivity for the identification of NIC and THC status over self-reporting.

Excessively low cholesterol and triglyceride levels in an apparently healthy patient.

Lipid panels are a commonly performed test in clinical laboratories. Due to the high prevalence of cardiovascular diseases around the world, it is common to see serum or plasma specimens with high results for one or more components of the lipid panel. Exceedingly low results, however, are rare and may be attributed to certain genetic, infectious, or autoimmune conditions in addition to analytical interference. Here we report a serum specimen from a 58-year-old female with cholesterol and triglyceride values below the detection limit of the assay, which was investigated to identify the cause of the anomaly. Using vitamin C test strips and high-performance liquid chromatography, the presence of high levels of antioxidant vitamin C in the patient specimen was confirmed. Subsequent treatment of the sample with the enzyme ascorbate oxidase inactivated vitamin C, leading to lipid analyte values falling within the expected range upon repeat analysis. Thus, analytical interference by vitamin C should be considered when suspiciously low lipid panel results are encountered.

Performance evaluation of five lipoprotein(a) immunoassays on the Roche cobas c501 chemistry analyzer.

OBJECTIVES: Measurement of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is used in risk assessment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). The aim of the current study was to evaluate performance characteristic of five different Lp(a) assays using the cobas c501 (Roche Diagnostics) analyzer. DESIGN AND METHODS: Lp(a) was measured using five Lp(a) assays (Diazyme, Kamiya, MedTest, Randox, and Roche) configured to mg/dL units. Assays from Diazyme and Kamiya were also configured using nmol/L units in separate experiments. Studies included sensitivity, imprecision, linearity, method comparison, and evaluation of healthy subjects. Imprecision (intra-day, 20 replicates; inter-day, duplicates twice daily for five days) and linearity were evaluated using patient pools. Linearity assessed a minimum of five patient splits spanning the analytical measurement range (AMR). Method comparison used 80 residual serum samples. Specimens from 120 self-reported healthy subjects (61 females / 59 males) were also tested. Method comparison for two assays in nmol/L units was conducted using 96 residual serum samples. RESULTS: Assay sensitivities met all manufacturer claims. Imprecision studies demonstrated %CVs ranging from 2.5 to 5.2% for the low pool (average concentration from 7.3 to 12.4 â€‹mg/dL); high pool %CVs ranged from 0.8 to 3.0% (average concentrations from 31.5-50.2 â€‹mg/dL). Linearity was confirmed for all assays. Variation in accuracy was observed when comparing results to an all method average. Lp(a) results were higher in females versus males in self-reported healthy subjects. CONCLUSIONS: All assays performed according to manufacturer described performance characteristics, although differences were observed across Lp(a) assays tested when compared to an all method average.