Literature DB >> 23592508

Failure of current laboratory protocols to detect lot-to-lot reagent differences: findings and possible solutions.

Alicia Algeciras-Schimnich1, David E Bruns, James C Boyd, Sandra C Bryant, Kristin A La Fortune, Stefan K G Grebe.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Maintaining consistency of results over time is a challenge in laboratory medicine. Lot-to-lot reagent changes are a major threat to consistency of results.
METHODS: For the period October 2007 through July 2012, we reviewed lot validation data for each new lot of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) reagents (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics) at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, and the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA. Analyses of discarded patient samples were used for comparison of lots. For the same period, we determined the distributions of reported patient results for each lot of reagents at the 2 institutions.
RESULTS: Lot-to-lot validation studies identified no reagent lot as significantly different from the preceding lot. By contrast, significant lot-to-lot changes were seen in the means and medians of 105 668 reported patient IGF-I results during the period. The frequency of increased results increased nearly 2-fold to a high of 17%, without detectable changes in the underlying patient demographics. Retrospective statistical analysis indicated that lot-to-lot comparison protocols were underpowered and that validation studies for this assay required testing >100 samples to achieve 90% power to detect reagent lots that would significantly alter the distributions of patient results.
CONCLUSIONS: The number of test samples required for adequate lot-to-lot validation protocols is high and may be prohibitively large, especially for low-volume or complex assays. Monitoring of the distributions of patient results has the potential to detect lot-to-lot inconsistencies relatively quickly. We recommend that manufacturers implement remote monitoring of patient results from analyzers in multiple institutions to allow rapid identification of between-lot result inconsistency.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23592508     DOI: 10.1373/clinchem.2013.205070

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


  19 in total

Review 1.  Lot-to-Lot Variation.

Authors:  Simon Thompson; Douglas Chesher
Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev       Date:  2018-05

2.  IGF-I levels reflect hypopituitarism severity in adults with pituitary dysfunction.

Authors:  Amit Tirosh; Yoel Toledano; Hiba Masri-Iraqi; Yoav Eizenberg; Gloria Tzvetov; Dania Hirsch; Carlos Benbassat; Eyal Robenshtok; Ilan Shimon
Journal:  Pituitary       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 4.107

3.  Discordance between mass spectrometry and immunometric IGF-1 assay in pituitary disease: a prospective study.

Authors:  Vivien Bonert; John Carmichael; Zengru Wu; James Mirocha; Daniel A Perez; Nigel J Clarke; Richard E Reitz; Michael J McPhaul; Adam Mamelak
Journal:  Pituitary       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 4.107

4.  Circulating Inflammation Markers, Risk of Lung Cancer, and Utility for Risk Stratification.

Authors:  Meredith S Shiels; Hormuzd A Katki; Allan Hildesheim; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Eric A Engels; Marcus Williams; Troy J Kemp; Neil E Caporaso; Ligia A Pinto; Anil K Chaturvedi
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Trends in surgery, hospital admissions and imaging for pituitary adenomas in Australia.

Authors:  Sjorjina Crowther; R Louise Rushworth; Wayne Rankin; Henrik Falhammar; Liza K Phillips; David J Torpy
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2017-11-04       Impact factor: 3.633

Review 6.  How sensitive (second-generation) thyroglobulin measurement is changing paradigms for monitoring patients with differentiated thyroid cancer, in the absence or presence of thyroglobulin autoantibodies.

Authors:  Carole Spencer; Jonathan LoPresti; Shireen Fatemi
Journal:  Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 3.243

Review 7.  Interpreting biochemical control response rates with first-generation somatostatin analogues in acromegaly.

Authors:  Annamaria Colao; Renata S Auriemma; Rosario Pivonello; Leandro Kasuki; Mônica R Gadelha
Journal:  Pituitary       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 4.107

8.  Missed detection of significant positive and negative shifts in gentamicin assay: implications for routine laboratory quality practices.

Authors:  Gus Koerbin; Jiakai Liu; Alex Eigenstetter; Chin Hon Tan; Tony Badrick; Tze Ping Loh
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2017-11-24       Impact factor: 2.313

9.  ANA IIF Automation: Moving towards Harmonization? Results of a Multicenter Study.

Authors:  Stefanie Van den Bremt; Sofie Schouwers; Marjan Van Blerk; Lieve Van Hoovels
Journal:  J Immunol Res       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 4.818

10.  Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers for Alzheimer's Disease: Emergence of the Solution to an Important Unmet Need.

Authors:  C E Teunissen; Eaj Willemse
Journal:  EJIFCC       Date:  2013-02-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.