Department of Pathology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Nov;51(11):3811-7. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02036-13. Epub 2013 Sep 11.
Commutability of quantitative reference materials has proven important for reliable and accurate results in clinical chemistry. As international reference standards and commercially produced calibration material have become available to address the variability of viral load assays, the degree to which such materials are commutable and the effect of commutability on assay concordance have been questioned. To investigate this, 60 archived clinical plasma samples, which previously tested positive for cytomegalovirus (CMV), were retested by five different laboratories, each using a different quantitative CMV PCR assay. Results from each laboratory were calibrated both with lab-specific quantitative CMV standards ("lab standards") and with common, commercially available standards ("CMV panel"). Pairwise analyses among laboratories were performed using mean results from each clinical sample, calibrated first with lab standards and then with the CMV panel. Commutability of the CMV panel was determined based on difference plots for each laboratory pair showing plotted values of standards that were within the 95% prediction intervals for the clinical specimens. Commutability was demonstrated for 6 of 10 laboratory pairs using the CMV panel. In half of these pairs, use of the CMV panel improved quantitative agreement compared to use of lab standards. Two of four laboratory pairs for which the CMV panel was noncommutable showed reduced quantitative agreement when that panel was used as a common calibrator. Commutability of calibration material varies across different quantitative PCR methods. Use of a common, commutable quantitative standard can improve agreement across different assays; use of a noncommutable calibrator can reduce agreement among laboratories.
定量参考物质的互换性已被证明对于临床化学中可靠和准确的结果非常重要。随着国际参考标准和商业生产的校准材料可用于解决病毒载量测定的可变性问题,这些材料的可互换性以及可互换性对测定一致性的影响受到了质疑。为了研究这个问题,我们对 60 份先前检测出巨细胞病毒(CMV)阳性的存档临床血浆样本进行了重新检测,由五个不同的实验室进行,每个实验室都使用不同的定量 CMV PCR 测定方法。每个实验室的结果都使用实验室特异性定量 CMV 标准(“实验室标准”)和常见的商业可用标准(“CMV 面板”)进行校准。通过使用每个临床样本的平均结果,在每个实验室之间进行了成对分析,首先用实验室标准校准,然后用 CMV 面板校准。CMV 面板的可互换性是基于每个实验室对的差异图确定的,这些图显示了标准的绘制值,这些值在临床标本的 95%预测区间内。使用 CMV 面板,有 6/10 的实验室对具有可互换性。在这些对中,有一半使用 CMV 面板可以提高与使用实验室标准相比的定量一致性。在不可互换的 CMV 面板的四个实验室对中,有两个实验室对在使用该面板作为通用校准器时,定量一致性降低。校准材料的可互换性在不同的定量 PCR 方法之间有所不同。使用通用的、可互换的定量标准可以提高不同测定方法之间的一致性;使用不可互换的校准器会降低实验室之间的一致性。