| Literature DB >> 26403809 |
Carmen M Martin-Ruiz, Duncan Baird, Laureline Roger, Petra Boukamp, Damir Krunic, Richard Cawthon, Martin M Dokter, Pim van der Harst, Sofie Bekaert, Tim de Meyer, Goran Roos, Ulrika Svenson, Veryan Codd, Nilesh J Samani, Liane McGlynn, Paul G Shiels, Karen A Pooley, Alison M Dunning, Rachel Cooper, Andrew Wong, Andrew Kingston, Thomas von Zglinicki.
Abstract
Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26403809 PMCID: PMC6312091 DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyv171
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Epidemiol ISSN: 0300-5771 Impact factor: 7.196
TLR as measured in the participating labs and inter-lab CVs in round 1 (to) and round 2 (bottom)
| Sample |
Round 1
| ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lab 1 | Lab 2 | Lab 3 | Lab 4 | Lab5 | Lab6 | Lab7 | Lab8 | Lab9 | CV for All Labs | CV for qPCR Labs | CV for qPCR triplets (median) | CV for South & STELA | |
| South | South | STELA | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | |||||
| A | 1.19 | 1.07 | 1.35 | 1.13 | 1.06 | 1.23 | 1.44 | 0.91 | 1.10 | 13.78 | 15.60 | 14.75 | 11.67 |
| B | 1.15 | 1.34 | 1.28 | 0.65 | 1.18 | 1.14 | 1.21 | 1.34 | 1.16 | 17.89 | 21.44 | 19.23 | 7.68 |
| C | 1.91 | 1.61 | 1.85 | 1.51 | 1.72 | 1.53 | 2.35 | 1.55 | 1.78 | 15.17 | 18.40 | 13.66 | 8.92 |
| D | 1.08 | 1.26 | 1.07 | 0.59 | 0.66 | 0.83 | 1.13 | 0.83 | 0.63 | 27.45 | 25.75 | 18.78 | 9.38 |
| E | 0.63 | 0.87 | 0.44 | 0.22 | 0.36 | 0.79 | 0.13 | 0.31 | 57.53 | 61.59 | 52.56 | 22.86 | |
| F | 0.63 | 0.79 | 0.79 | 0.39 | 0.19 | 0.28 | 0.46 | 0.39 | 0.14 | 53.46 | 40.54 | 42.92 | 12.80 |
|
G
| 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| H | 0.64 | 0.68 | 0.75 | 0.17 | 0.31 | 0.33 | 0.31 | 0.13 | 57.93 | 36.87 | 41.46 | 7.79 | |
| I | 0.91 | 1.11 | 0.94 | 1.30 | 1.52 | 1.10 | 1.80 | 1.39 | 1.79 | 25.44 | 18.65 | 16.93 | 10.86 |
| J | 0.90 | 0.95 | 0.94 | 0.88 | 0.86 | 0.83 | 1.15 | 0.89 | 0.89 | 10.21 | 12.83 | 9.74 | 2.68 |
TLR, telomere length ratio; CVs, coefficients of variation.
a All TLR values were calculated as the ratio of the estimated telomere length for a particular sample, divided by the estimated telomere length for sample G.
b The second round of measurements was designed to enable inter-batch comparison and included 5 repeat samples from the first round (B, C, G, H, I), of which samples C, G and H were duplicated (for intra-batch comparison). CVs for qPCR labs were higher than those for Southern/STELA labs (p = 0.000, paired t-test).
Intra-batch CVs per laboratory
| Sample | Lab 1 | Lab 2 | Lab 3 | Lab 4 | Lab5 | Lab6 | Lab7 | Lab8 | Lab9 | Lab 10 | Lab 10-2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| name | South | South | STELA | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR |
| C | 1.702 | 0.178 | 10.294 | 7.799 | 1.903 | 4.771 | 4.566 | 3.354 | 11.934 | 31.299 | |
| G | 4.614 | 3.481 | 4.374 | 1.331 | 2.162 | 2.156 | 4.721 | 0.324 | 0.470 | 7.095 | 20.089 |
| H | 1.083 | 2.007 | 1.489 | 1.304 | 7.018 | 8.985 | 3.861 | 0.000 | 2.404 | 6.264 |
Inter-batch CVs per laboratory
| Sample | Lab 1 | Lab 2 | Lab 3 | Lab 4 | Lab 5 | Lab 6 | Lab 7 | Lab 8 | Lab 9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| name | Tech 1 | Tech 1 | Tech 2 | Tech 3 | Tech 3 | Tech 3 | Tech 3 | Tech 3 | Tech 3 |
| B | 13.388 | 1.499 | 11.627 | 17.989 | 3.046 | 5.215 | 11.522 | 7.431 | 11.314 |
| C | 15.305 | 3.368 | 3.772 | 6.497 | 3.564 | 1.652 | 28.906 | 1.709 | 3.973 |
| G | 2.270 | 1.719 | 2.154 | 0.669 | 1.073 | 1.086 | 2.322 | 0.162 | 0.235 |
| H | 8.813 | 2.980 | 1.259 | 11.650 | 8.925 | 7.144 | 0.850 | 13.671 | |
| I | 3.877 | 7.991 | 3.755 | 0.897 | 2.175 | 8.620 | 22.052 | 1.093 | 7.395 |
Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients between participating laboratories
| Round 1 | Lab 1 South | Lab 2 South | Lab 3 STELA | Lab 4 qPCR | Lab 5 qPCR | Lab 6 qPCR | Lab 7 qPCR | Lab 8 qPCR | Lab 9 qPCR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lab 1 South | 1.000 | ||||||||
| Lab 2 South | 0.855 | 1.000 | |||||||
| Lab 3 STELA | 0.983 | 0.867 | 1.000 | ||||||
| Lab 4 qPCR | 0.650 | 0.600 | 0.524 | 1.000 | |||||
| Lab 5 qPCR | 0.770 | 0.855 | 0.750 | 0.900 | 1.000 | ||||
| Lab 6 qPCR | 0.879 | 0.818 | 0.867 | 0.867 | 0.939 | 1.000 | |||
| Lab 7 qPCR | 0.770 | 0.842 | 0.750 | 0.883 | 0.952 | 0.915 | 1.000 | ||
| Lab 8 qPCR | 0.770 | 0.806 | 0.700 | 0.867 | 0.952 | 0.867 | 0.867 | 1.000 | |
| Lab 9 qPCR | 0.709 | 0.818 | 0.667 | 0.883 | 0.988 | 0.903 | 0.939 | 0.939 | 1.000 |
z-scored results from all participating laboratories in round 1 (top) and 2 (bottom) and inter-laboratory variation in z scores (as standard deviation) between all laboratories and separated by technique
| Lab 1 | Lab 2 | Lab 3 | Lab 4 | Lab 5 | Lab 6 | Lab 7 | Lab 8 | Lab 9 | Lab 10 | lab 10-2 | SD | SD | SD South/ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| South | South | STELA | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | qPCR | all | qPCR | STELA |
| round 1 | |||||||||||||
| 0.453 | −0.012 | 0.751 | 0.480 | 0.306 | 0.703 | 0.663 | −0.033 | 0.319 | 0.288 | 0.271 | 0.385 | ||
| 0.344 | 0.928 | 0.540 | −0.666 | 0.527 | 0.492 | 0.239 | 0.876 | 0.417 | 0.463 | 0.524 | 0.296 | ||
| 2.414 | 1.894 | 2.280 | 1.395 | 1.538 | 1.419 | 2.370 | 1.330 | 1.484 | 0.453 | 0.389 | 0.270 | ||
| 0.165 | 0.670 | −0.094 | −0.795 | −0.426 | −0.242 | 0.083 | −0.210 | −0.491 | 0.426 | 0.298 | 0.390 | ||
| −1.075 | −0.727 | −1.172 | −1.245 | −1.358 | −0.561 | −1.699 | −1.030 | 0.357 | 0.379 | 0.246 | |||
| −1.073 | −1.004 | −0.958 | −1.280 | −1.303 | −1.541 | −1.176 | −1.159 | −1.312 | 0.181 | 0.138 | 0.058 | ||
| −0.061 | −0.264 | −0.320 | 0.177 | 0.201 | 0.165 | −0.162 | 0.161 | 0.147 | 0.209 | 0.137 | 0.136 | ||
| −1.035 | −1.416 | −1.092 | −1.333 | −1.474 | −1.423 | −1.327 | −1.337 | 0.158 | 0.067 | 0.205 | |||
| −0.295 | 0.129 | −0.506 | 0.891 | 1.166 | 0.413 | 1.338 | 0.998 | 1.496 | 0.723 | 0.382 | 0.324 | ||
| −0.338 | −0.457 | −0.519 | −0.117 | −0.054 | −0.236 | 0.124 | −0.066 | −0.049 | 0.213 | 0.117 | 0.092 | ||
| round 2 | |||||||||||||
| 0.998 | 1.029 | 1.242 | −0.217 | 0.435 | 0.300 | 0.643 | 0.591 | 0.124 | −0.143 | 0.140 | 0.483 | 0.317 | 0.133 |
| 1.349 | 1.635 | 1.454 | 1.549 | 1.455 | 0.778 | 1.521 | 1.386 | 1.624 | 1.397 | 0.398 | 0.414 | 0.244 | |
| 1.449 | 1.622 | 1.987 | 2.030 | 1.215 | 1.554 | 0.974 | 1.302 | 1.250 | 1.131 | 0.169 | |||
| −0.093 | −0.098 | 0.043 | −0.592 | −0.572 | −0.455 | −0.095 | −0.177 | −0.705 | −0.336 | −0.365 | 0.247 | 0.210 | 0.080 |
| −0.313 | −0.073 | −0.231 | −0.880 | −0.794 | −0.817 | −0.704 | −0.444 | −0.803 | −0.387 | 0.289 | 0.242 | 0.170 | |
| −0.233 | −0.434 | −0.503 | 0.222 | 0.146 | 0.239 | −0.283 | 0.151 | 0.158 | 0.273 | 0.919 | 0.310 | 0.245 | 0.157 |
| −0.061 | −0.264 | −0.320 | 0.177 | 0.201 | 0.165 | −0.162 | 0.161 | 0.147 | 0.100 | 0.195 | |||
| −1.228 | −1.349 | −1.077 | −1.313 | −1.295 | −1.446 | −1.317 | −1.376 | −1.336 | −1.566 | 0.138 | 0.104 | 0.123 | |
| −1.252 | −1.278 | −1.028 | −1.296 | −1.258 | −1.561 | −1.517 | −1.352 | −1.376 | −1.329 | −1.527 | |||
| −0.428 | −0.292 | −0.351 | 0.853 | 1.081 | 0.754 | 0.429 | 0.953 | 1.193 | 0.819 | 1.024 | 0.615 | 0.235 | 0.068 |
|
| 0.310 | 0.245 | 0.170 | ||||||||||
Test results
|
Analysis
| original value in the paper | corrected value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients (abstract and results p4 1 st para) | Range: 0.63 −0.99 | Range: 0.25 −0.99 | |||
| Paired T-test CVs (SB+STELA) vs CVs qPCR (Results p.4 2 nd para) | p = 0.001 | p = 1.8x10 −7 | |||
| Linear regression of LTRs South/STELA vs qPCR (p6 1 st para) | Offset: −0.55 ± 0.32 | Offset: −0.49 ± 0.32 | |||
| Slope: 1.38 ± 0.30 | Slope: 1.30 ± 0.30 | ||||
| Intra-batch CV values (Table 3, p6 2 nd para) | Differences between labs | Labs 1 to 10-1 ANOVA, p = 0.299 | Labs 1 to 10.1 ANOVA, p = 0.299 | ||
| Labs 1 to 10-2 Kruskal-Wallis, p = 0.089 | |||||
| Median intra-batch CVs per technique | 1.86% (SB); 2.83% (STELA); 4.57% (qPCR) | 1.86% (SB); 2.93% (STELA); 4.57% (qPCR) | |||
| Differences between techniques (Kruskal-Wallis) | p = 0.161 | p = 0.201 | |||
| Differences between techniques with SOUTH and STELA combined (Mann-Whitney) | p = 0.075 | p = 0.082 | |||