Literature DB >> 16525589

A model for the harmonisation of test results of different quantitative D-dimer methods.

Piet Meijer1, Frits Haverkate, Cornelis Kluft, Philippe de Moerloose, Bert Verbruggen, Michael Spannagl.   

Abstract

The numerical test results of different D-dimer assays vary widely. Because of the complexity of the analyte of target as well as the variability in specificity of different D-dimer assays, only harmonisation of the test results seems to be feasible. The use of a single conversion factor does not take into account for several methods the lack of commutability between test results and consensus values at different D-dimer levels. This is probably related to the mutually different response of methods to high and low levels. We therefore designed a harmonisation model based on the transformation of a method-specific regression line to a reference regression line. We used the data for the measurement of a set of plasma samples with different D-dimer levels by 353 different laboratories using 7 of the most frequently used quantitative D-dimer methods. For each method we calculated the method-specific consensus value for each sample. The overall median value was also estimated. Per method linear regression was applied throughout the method-specific consensus values using the amount of patient pooled plasma added to the different plasma samples as the independent variable. The line through the overall median values of all 7 methods was used as the reference line. Harmonisation between the methods was obtained by transformation of the method-specific regression line to the reference line. This harmonisation resulted in a reduction of the variability between the method-specific consensus values from about 75% to about 5.5%. Clinical validation of this concept had shown significant improvement of the test result comparability. We conclude that this model is a feasible approach in the harmonisation of D-dimer methods. If the harmonisation procedure is included in the calibration procedure by the manufacturers, customers will automatically obtain harmonised test results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16525589     DOI: 10.1160/TH05-01-0042

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Thromb Haemost        ISSN: 0340-6245            Impact factor:   5.249


  8 in total

Review 1.  Biochemical markers for the diagnosis of venous thromboembolism: the past, present and future.

Authors:  Giuseppe Lippi; Gianfranco Cervellin; Massimo Franchini; Emmanuel J Favaloro
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.300

2.  VEGF Inhibitors Do Not Increase D-dimer Levels in Colorectal Cancer Patients Without Venous Thromboembolism: A Retrospective Non-inferiority Analysis

Authors:  Hirokazu Toshima; Toshikazu Ikusue; Atsushi Hisamatsu; Kouji Kobayashi; Hiroo Ishida; Ken Shimada
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2019 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.155

3.  Is it possible to make a common reference standard for D-dimer measurements? Communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Fibrinolysis.

Authors:  Sally Bevan; Colin Longstaff
Journal:  J Thromb Haemost       Date:  2021-11-24       Impact factor: 16.036

4.  Monoclonal antibodies with equal specificity to D-dimer and high-molecular-weight fibrin degradation products.

Authors:  Alexander E Kogan; Kadriya S Mukharyamova; Anastasia V Bereznikova; Vladimir L Filatov; Ekaterina V Koshkina; Marina N Bloshchitsyna; Alexey G Katrukha
Journal:  Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 1.276

Review 5.  Measuring fibrinolysis: from research to routine diagnostic assays.

Authors:  C Longstaff
Journal:  J Thromb Haemost       Date:  2018-02-17       Impact factor: 5.824

6.  Verification of automated latex-enhanced particle immunoturbidimetric D-Dimer assays on different analytical platforms and comparability of test results.

Authors:  Ivana Lapić; Désirée Coen Herak; Snježana Prpić; Andrea Prce; Vanja Raščanec; Renata Zadro; Dunja Rogić
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2020-10-15       Impact factor: 2.313

7.  The need for accurate D-dimer reporting in COVID-19: Communication from the ISTH SSC on fibrinolysis.

Authors:  Jecko Thachil; Colin Longstaff; Emmanuel J Favaloro; Giuseppe Lippi; Tetsumei Urano; Paul Y Kim
Journal:  J Thromb Haemost       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 16.036

8.  Harmonized D-dimer levels upon admission for prognosis of COVID-19 severity: Results from a Spanish multicenter registry (BIOCOVID-Spain study).

Authors:  Luis García de Guadiana-Romualdo; Daniel Morell-García; Emmanuel J Favaloro; Juan A Vílchez; Josep M Bauça; María J Alcaide Martín; Irene Gutiérrez Garcia; Patricia de la Hera Cagigal; José Manuel Egea-Caparrós; Sonia Pérez Sanmartín; José I Gutiérrez Revilla; Eloísa Urrechaga; Jose M Álamo; Ana M Hernando Holgado; María-Carmen Lorenzo-Lozano; Magdalena Canalda Campás; María A Juncos Tobarra; Cristian Morales-Indiano; Isabel Vírseda Chamorro; Yolanda Pastor Murcia; Laura Sahuquillo Frías; Laura Altimira Queral; Elisa Nuez-Zaragoza; Juan Adell Ruiz de León; Alicia Ruiz Ripa; Paloma Salas Gómez-Pablos; Iria Cebreiros López; Amaia Fernández Uriarte; Alex Larruzea; María L López Yepes; Natalia Sancho-Rodríguez; María C Zamorano Andrés; José Pedregosa Díaz; Luis Sáenz; Clara Esparza Del Valle; María C Baamonde Calzada; Sara García Muñoz; Marina Vera; Esther Martín Torres; Silvia Sánchez Fdez-Pacheco; Luis Vicente Gutiérrez; Laura Jiménez Añón; Alfonso Pérez Martínez; Aurelio Pons Castillo; Ruth González Tamayo; Jorge Férriz Vivancos; Olaia Rodríguez-Fraga; Vicens Díaz-Brito; Vicente Aguadero; M G García Arévalo; María Arnaldos Carrillo; Mercedes González Morales; María Núñez Gárate; Cristina Ruiz Iruela; Patricia Esteban Torrella; Martí Vila Pérez; Cristina Acevedo Alcaraz; Alfonso L Blázquez-Manzanera; Amparo Galán Ortega
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 2.300

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.