Traceability as a means to obtain worldwide useful reference intervals

Transkript

1 Traceability as a means to obtain worldwide useful reference intervals Prof. Dr. Yeşim Özarda IFCC, The Committee on Reference Intervals and Decision Limits (C-RIDL), Chair Department of Clinical Biochemistry Uludag University Medical Faculty, Bursa, Turkey

2

3 Uludag University, Medical Faculty, Teaching and Research Hospital, Bursa, Turkey

4 Contents Reliable reference intervals (RIs) and Common RIs Muticenter studies (C-RIDL) Traceability Comparability Conclusions

5 National Measurement Institutes primary calibrator definition of (SI) unit primary reference measurement manufacturer s working manufacturer s product calibrator routine sample Manufacturers secondary reference measurement manufacturer s standing measurement end-user s routine measurement result Laboratories

6 How to obtain reliable RIs? A reference measurement system for the analyte reference materials reference methods reference laboratory network reduce the measurement uncertainty implement measurement traceability

7

8 How to obtain reliable common RIs? A reference measurement system for the analyte reference materials reference methods reference laboratory network To produce common RIs, the trueness of laboratoies verified

9 NORIP Reference Material; NFKK Reference Serum X RV recalculated according to the target values of Serum X 9

10 AST, ALT, GGT measured in three centers Trueness control materials at three different concentrations Aligned to the expected values assigned by the reference labs

11

12

13 The IFCC, C-RIDL global multicenter study, 2011 Philippine

14 USA China Saudi A. S. Africa Canada Nepal Russia Australia China Russia Bangladesh Japan BC USA Turkey C-RIDL in Istanbul, June22-24, 2014 Russia Turkey UK, SD Chair USA S Africa India Australia Abbott Russia BC Canada Nepal Pakistan India Japan Malaysia

15 Objectives of the IFCC global study-1 Standardisation of the multicenter study (1)To obtain test results traceable to the reference measurement procedure (2)To allow each country to run a multicenter study using the common protocol

16 Preanalitik Analitik Postanalitik

17 Objectives of the IFCC global study-2 Worldwide comparison of reference values (1) To make test results comparable across countries through measurement of a panel of sera (2) To explore sources of variations*on a global scale from the aligned results * Race, region, gender,, age, BMI, lifestyle-related factors

18 Requirements of the Central Laboratory Standardization of the assay Standard Reference Materials and Trueness Control Materials Quality Control Panel of Sera 5 healthy individuals, each measurement day Cross Comparison between centres Panel of sera 80healthy individuals, divided into 4, tested on 4 separate days

19 The use of the panel allows highly reliable recalibration of RVs for all analytes

20 Based on the panel test results, a between-laboratory value conversion scheme

21 Comparison of panel test results for AST AsV CHN JPN IND NEP SAU TUR GBR ZAF USA ARG Based on the linear relationship of the assigned and measured values, the test results were recalibrated. AsnVal AsV CHN JPN IND IND NEP NEP SAU SAU TUR GBR TUK ZAF GBR USA ZAF ARG

22 Before alignment SDR=0.42 After alignment SDR=0.17 CV(b)

23 Multicenter, nationwide RI study for common biocehmical analytes in TURKEY Lüleburgaz Dev. Hast., Kırklareli, n=48 İstanbul Univ., Kard. Enst. İstanbul, n=80 Şişli Etfal Eğitim Hast., İstanbul, n=62 Uludağ Üniv., Bursa, n=400 Selçuklu Üniv., Selçuklu, Konya,n=100 Karaelmas Üniv., Zonguldak,n=102 Ankara Eğitim Hast, Ankara,n=69 Hacettepe Üniv., Ankara,n=119 OM Üniv.,Samsun n=100 Ordu Univ.,Ordu n=100 Karadeniz T.Univ., Trabzon,n=102 GATA, Ankara,n=40 Keçi Ören Eğitim Hast., Ankara,n=40 NEB Üniv., Meram, Konya,n=80 Kars Devlet Hast., Kars,n=80 Atatürk Üniv., Erzurum,n=240 Celal Bayar Üniv., Manisa, n=120 İnvitro Lab, Elaz Dokuz Eylül Üniv., İzmir, n=81 Pamukkale Üniv, Denizli,n=80 Servergazi Hast, Denizli, n=115 Akdeniz Üniv, Antalya, n=45 Medical Park Hast. Antalya, n=80 Mersin Üniv, Mersin,n=100 Adana Başkent Üniv, Adana,n=100 G.Antep Üniv, Antep, n=280 Dicle Üniv, Diyarbakır, n=128 Batman Bölge Hast., Batman, n=160 SRMs and panel of sera used to ensure the traceability and comparability of the test results in Bursa.

24 Measurements Requirements of the Central Laboratory Standardization of the assay Standard Reference Materials, NIST Quality Control Panel of Sera 5 healthy individuals, each measurement day As there were no significant differences, we obtained nation-wide CRIs for Turkey. Cross Comparison between centres Panel of sera 40healthy individuals, divided into 4, tested on 4 separate days

25 Using the regression lines, laboratory-specific RIs derived for each parameter

26 Biochemia Medica 2016;26(1):5-16 Multicenter studies can be organised as - (1) Only the central laboratory is to analyse all the samples from all the participating laboratories (simpler, more reliable results) (2) Each participating laboratory is to analyse its own samples (more complex planning)

27 as an example of the 2.option Multicenter, nationwide RI study for hematological parameters in TURKEY Uludağ Univ., Bursa, n=420 Selçuklu Univ., Selçuklu, Konya,n=260 Keçi Ören Hosp, Ankara,n=401 Ordu Univ.,Ordu n=147 Karadeniz T.Univ., Trabzon,n=274 Atatürk Univ., Erzurum,n=480 Dokuz Eylül Univ., İzmir, n=225 Celal Bayar Univ., Manisa, n=201 Medical Park Hospital, Antalya, n=150 Mersin Univ, Mersin,n=230 Harran Univ, Urfa, n=264 Dicle Univ, Diyarbakır, n=240. The EDTA blood samples analyzed within 2 hrs in the participating labs

28 Panel of EDTA blood prepared in a single centre, distributed to all the centers within 12 hrs. All the labs measured the samples İstanbul FSM Hosp. İstanbul,(Blood panels) Uludağ Univ., Bursa Selçuklu Univ., Selçuklu, Konya Keçi Ören Hosp, Ankara Ordu Univ.,Ordu Karadeniz T.Univ., Trabzon Atatürk Univ., Erzurum Dokuz Eylül Univ., İzmir Celal Bayar Univ., Manisa, Medical Park Hospital, Antalya Mersin Univ, Mersin Harran Univ, Urfa, Dicle Univ, Diyarbakır, There is no SRM for most of the hematological parameters

29 The results of ANOVA Panel test results SDR BL1 =0.24 Volunteer test results SDR BL2M =0.27 SDR BL2F =0.23 A:Bursa (40) A:Ordu (40) A:Konya (40) A:Urfa (40) A:Diyarbakir (40) B:Manisa (40) B:Izmir (40) B:Ankara (40) B:Trabzon (40) B:Erzurum (40) S:Antalya (40) S:Mersin (40) WBC 10^9/L A:Bursa (163) A:Ordu (115) A:Konya (121) A:Urfa (159) A:Diyarbakir (105) B:Manisa (61) B:Izmir (102) B:Ankara (158) B:Trabzon (191) B:Erzurum (209) S:Antalya (73) S:Mersin (104) WBC 10^9/L Male Female there was no difference among the participating labs

30 The results of ANOVA Panel test results SDR BL1 = * Volunteer test results SDR BL2M = * SDR BL2F = * v A:Bursa (247) A:Ordu (122) A:Konya (122) A:Urfa (98) A:Diyarbakir (112) B:Manisa (114) B:Izmir (94) B:Ankara (213) B:Trabzon (181) B:Erzurum (224) S:Antalya (66) S:Mersin v (112) MCV fl * between-lab SDR after excluding Mersin the data to be combined and CRIs to be derived

31 refers to the use of the CRIs across different platforms and/or assays for a specified analyte

32

33 A checklist approach Plan for the implementation of adult and pediatric CRIs

34 Conclusions Common reference intervals are of great interest Need for standardized multicenter studies Traceability is the most critical issue Comparability of the laboratories Harmonization of RIs; direct studies, consensus procedure including indirect studies

35 ISTANBUL

36 FETHIYE THANK YOU! PAMUKKALE CAPPADOCIA EPHESUS