Thienpont Linda M, Van Uytfanghe Katleen, De Grande Linde A C, Reynders Dries, Das Barnali, Faix James D, MacKenzie Finlay, Decallonne Brigitte, Hishinuma Akira, Lapauw Bruno, Taelman Paul, Van Crombrugge Paul, Van den Bruel Annick, Velkeniers Brigitte, Williams Paul
Department of Pharmaceutical Analysis, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium;
Current affiliation: Thienpont & Stöckl Wissenschaftliches Consulting GbR, Rennertshofen (OT Bertoldsheim), Germany.
Clin Chem. 2017 Jul;63(7):1248-1260. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2016.269456. Epub 2017 May 18.
The IFCC Committee for Standardization of Thyroid Function Tests developed a global harmonization approach for thyroid-stimulating hormone measurements. It is based on a multiassay method comparison study with clinical serum samples and target setting with a robust factor analysis method. Here we describe the Phase IV method comparison and reference interval (RI) studies conducted with the objective to recalibrate the participating assays and demonstrate the proof-of-concept.
Fourteen manufacturers measured the harmonization and RI panel; 4 of them quantified the harmonization and first follow-up panel in parallel. All recalibrated their assays to the statistically inferred targets. For validation, we used desirable specifications from the biological variation for the bias and total error (TE). The RI measurements were done with the assays' current calibrators, but data were also reported after transformation to the new calibration status. We estimated the pre- and postrecalibration RIs with a nonparametric bootstrap procedure.
After recalibration, 14 of 15 assays met the bias specification with 95% confidence; 8 assays complied with the TE specification. The CV of the assay means for the harmonization panel was reduced from 9.5% to 4.2%. The RI study showed improved uniformity after recalibration: the ranges (i.e., maximum differences) exhibited by the assay-specific 2.5th, 50th, and 97.5th percentile estimates were reduced from 0.27, 0.89, and 2.13 mIU/L to 0.12, 0.29, and 0.77 mIU/L.
We showed that harmonization increased the agreement of results from the participating immunoassays, and may allow them to adopt a more uniform RI in the future.
国际临床化学和检验医学联合会(IFCC)甲状腺功能测试标准化委员会制定了一种促甲状腺激素测量的全球协调方法。该方法基于对临床血清样本的多分析方法比较研究以及使用稳健因子分析方法进行的目标设定。在此,我们描述了为重新校准参与的分析方法并证明概念验证而进行的IV期方法比较和参考区间(RI)研究。
14家制造商测量了协调和RI样本组;其中4家同时对协调和首次随访样本组进行了定量分析。所有制造商均将其分析方法重新校准至统计推断的目标值。为进行验证,我们使用了生物学变异中关于偏倚和总误差(TE)的理想规范。RI测量使用分析方法的当前校准品进行,但数据也在转换为新校准状态后进行了报告。我们使用非参数自助法估计了重新校准前后的RI。
重新校准后,15种分析方法中的14种在95%置信度下符合偏倚规范;8种分析方法符合TE规范。协调样本组分析方法均值的变异系数从9.5%降至4.2%。RI研究表明重新校准后一致性有所提高:各分析方法特异性的第2.5、50和97.5百分位数估计值所显示的范围(即最大差异)从0.27、0.89和2.13 mIU/L降至0.12、0.29和0.77 mIU/L。
我们表明,协调提高了参与免疫分析方法结果的一致性,并可能使它们未来采用更统一的RI。