Personalized and Population-Based Reference Intervals for 48 Common Clinical Chemistry and Hematology Measurands: A Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND

Personalized reference intervals (prRIs) have the potential to improve individual patient follow-up as compared to population-based reference intervals (popRI). In this study, we estimated popRI and prRIs for 48 clinical chemistry and hematology measurands using samples from the same reference individuals and explored the effect of using group-based and individually based biological variation (BV) estimates to derive prRIs.

METHODS

143 individuals (median age 28 years) were included in the study and had fasting blood samples collected once. From this population, 41 randomly selected subjects had samples collected weekly for 5 weeks. PopRIs were estimated according to Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute EP28 and within-subject BV (CVI) were estimated by CV-ANOVA. Data were assessed for trends and outliers prior to calculation of individual prRIs, based on estimates of (a) within-person BV (CVP), (b) CVI derived in this study, and (c) publically available CVI estimates.

RESULTS

For most measurands, the individual prRI ranges were smaller than the popRI range, but overall about half the study participants had a prRI wider than the popRI for 5 or more out of 48 measurands. The dispersion of prRIs based on CVP was wider than that of prRIs based on CVI.

CONCLUSION

The prRIs derived in our study varied significantly between different individuals, especially if based on CVP. Our results highlight the limitations of popRIs in interpreting test results of individual patients. If sufficient data from a steady-state situation are available, using prRI based on CVP estimates will provide a RI most specific for an individual patient.