Department of Clinical Science at North Bristol, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Clin Trials. 2010;7(1 Suppl):S56-64. doi: 10.1177/1740774510373496.
and
Three network laboratories measured antibodies to islet autoantigens. Antibodies to glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD65 [GADA]) and the intracellular portion of protein tyrosine phosphatase (IA-2(ic) [IA-2A]) were measured by similar, but not identical, methods in samples from participants in the Type 1 Diabetes Genetics Consortium (T1DGC).
All laboratories used radiobinding assays to detect antibodies to in vitro transcribed and translated antigen, but with different local standards, calibrated against the World Health Organization (WHO) reference reagent. Using a common method to calculate WHO units/mL, we compared results reported on samples included in the Diabetes Autoantibody Standardization Program (DASP), and developed standard methods for reporting in WHO units/mL. We evaluated intra-assay and inter-assay coefficient of variation (CV) in blind duplicate samples and assay comparability in four DASP workshops.
Values were linearly related in the three laboratories for both GADA and IA-2A, and intra-assay technical errors for values within the standard curve were below 13% for GADA and below 8.5% for IA-2A. Correlations in samples tested 1-2 years apart were >97%. Over the course of the study, internal CVs were 10-20% with one exception, and the laboratories concordantly called samples GADA or IA-2A positive or negative in 96.7% and 99.6% of duplicates within the standard curve. Despite acceptable CVs and general concordance in ranking samples, the laboratories differed markedly in absolute values for GADA and IA-2A reported in WHO units/mL in DASP over a large range of values.
With three laboratories using different assay methods (including calibrators), consistent values among them could not be attained.
Modifications in the assays are needed to improve comparability of results expressed as WHO units/mL across laboratories. It will be essential to retain high intra- and inter-assay precision, sensitivity and specificity and to confirm the accuracy of harmonized methods.
和
三个网络实验室检测胰岛自身抗体。谷氨酸脱羧酶(GAD65[GADA])和蛋白酪氨酸磷酸酶的细胞内部分(IA-2(ic)[IA-2A])的抗体通过类似但不完全相同的方法在 1 型糖尿病遗传学联合会(T1DGC)参与者的样本中进行测量。
所有实验室均使用放射结合测定法检测体外转录和翻译抗原的抗体,但使用不同的本地标准,根据世界卫生组织(WHO)参考试剂进行校准。使用一种通用方法计算 WHO 单位/ml,我们比较了包含在糖尿病自身抗体标准化计划(DASP)中的样本报告的结果,并开发了以 WHO 单位/ml 报告的标准方法。我们评估了盲法重复样本中的室内和室内变异系数(CV)以及四个 DASP 研讨会中的检测可比性。
在三个实验室中,GADA 和 IA-2A 的值均呈线性关系,标准曲线内值的室内技术误差低于 GADA 的 13%,低于 IA-2A 的 8.5%。相隔 1-2 年测试的样本相关性大于 97%。在研究过程中,内部 CV 为 10-20%,只有一个例外,实验室在标准曲线内的 96.7%和 99.6%的重复样本中一致地将样本称为 GADA 或 IA-2A 阳性或阴性。尽管 CV 可接受且在对样本进行分类方面具有总体一致性,但在 DASP 中以 WHO 单位/ml 报告的 GADA 和 IA-2A 的绝对值在很大范围内,三个实验室之间存在明显差异。
由于三个实验室使用不同的检测方法(包括校准物),因此无法达到它们之间的一致值。
需要对检测进行修改,以提高实验室之间以 WHO 单位/ml 表示的结果的可比性。保留高的室内和室内精密度、敏感性和特异性并确认协调方法的准确性将是至关重要的。