Literature DB >> 21677092

Roadmap for harmonization of clinical laboratory measurement procedures.

W Greg Miller1, Gary L Myers, Mary Lou Gantzer, Stephen E Kahn, E Ralf Schönbrunner, Linda M Thienpont, David M Bunk, Robert H Christenson, John H Eckfeldt, Stanley F Lo, C Micha Nübling, Catharine M Sturgeon.   

Abstract

Results between different clinical laboratory measurement procedures (CLMP) should be equivalent, within clinically meaningful limits, to enable optimal use of clinical guidelines for disease diagnosis and patient management. When laboratory test results are neither standardized nor harmonized, a different numeric result may be obtained for the same clinical sample. Unfortunately, some guidelines are based on test results from a specific laboratory measurement procedure without consideration of the possibility or likelihood of differences between various procedures. When this happens, aggregation of data from different clinical research investigations and development of appropriate clinical practice guidelines will be flawed. A lack of recognition that results are neither standardized nor harmonized may lead to erroneous clinical, financial, regulatory, or technical decisions. Standardization of CLMPs has been accomplished for several measurands for which primary (pure substance) reference materials exist and/or reference measurement procedures (RMPs) have been developed. However, the harmonization of clinical laboratory procedures for measurands that do not have RMPs has been problematic owing to inadequate definition of the measurand, inadequate analytical specificity for the measurand, inadequate attention to the commutability of reference materials, and lack of a systematic approach for harmonization. To address these problems, an infrastructure must be developed to enable a systematic approach for identification and prioritization of measurands to be harmonized on the basis of clinical importance and technical feasibility, and for management of the technical implementation of a harmonization process for a specific measurand.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21677092     DOI: 10.1373/clinchem.2011.164012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem        ISSN: 0009-9147            Impact factor:   8.327


  45 in total

1.  Measuring Estrogen Exposure and Metabolism: Workshop Recommendations on Clinical Issues.

Authors:  L M Demers; S E Hankinson; S Haymond; T Key; W Rosner; R J Santen; F Z Stanczyk; H W Vesper; R G Ziegler
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 5.958

2.  Measurements for 8 common analytes in native sera identify inadequate standardization among 6 routine laboratory assays.

Authors:  Hedwig C M Stepman; Ulla Tiikkainen; Dietmar Stöckl; Hubert W Vesper; Selvin H Edwards; Harri Laitinen; Jonna Pelanti; Linda M Thienpont
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2014-03-31       Impact factor: 8.327

3.  Results of continuous monitoring of the performance of rubella virus IgG and hepatitis B virus surface antibody assays using trueness controls in a multicenter trial.

Authors:  Tamara Kruk; Sam Ratnam; Jutta Preiksaitis; Allan Lau; Todd Hatchette; Greg Horsman; Paul Van Caeseele; Brian Timmons; Graham Tipples
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2012-08-15

Review 4.  Vitamin D assays and the definition of hypovitaminosis D: results from the First International Conference on Controversies in Vitamin D.

Authors:  Christopher T Sempos; Annemieke C Heijboer; Daniel D Bikle; Jens Bollerslev; Roger Bouillon; Patsy M Brannon; Hector F DeLuca; Glenville Jones; Craig F Munns; John P Bilezikian; Andrea Giustina; Neil Binkley
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2018-07-17       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 5.  Reference standards for next-generation sequencing.

Authors:  Simon A Hardwick; Ira W Deveson; Tim R Mercer
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 53.242

Review 6.  Use of CTX-I and PINP as bone turnover markers: National Bone Health Alliance recommendations to standardize sample handling and patient preparation to reduce pre-analytical variability.

Authors:  P Szulc; K Naylor; N R Hoyle; R Eastell; E T Leary
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 7.  Calculated Chemistry Parameters - do they need to be harmonised?

Authors:  David Hughes; James Cg Doery; Kay Weng Choy; Robert Flatman
Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev       Date:  2016-08

Review 8.  Harmonization of Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Protein Assays.

Authors:  Alan L Rockwood; Mark S Lowenthal; Cory Bystrom
Journal:  Clin Lab Med       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.935

9.  Harmonisation of laboratory testing.

Authors:  Jillian R Tate; Roger Johnson; Michael Legg
Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev       Date:  2012-08

10.  From lost in translation to paradise found: enabling protein biomarker method transfer by mass spectrometry.

Authors:  Russell P Grant; Andrew N Hoofnagle
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2014-05-08       Impact factor: 8.327

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.