Zhimin Tim Cao1, Julianne Cook Botelho2, Robert Rej3, Hubert Vesper4. 1. Wadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health, Albany, NY, United States; College of Arts and Sciences, University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, NY, United States. 2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States. 3. Wadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health, Albany, NY, United States; School of Public Health, University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, NY, United States. 4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States. Electronic address: hvesper@cdc.gov.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accurate testosterone measurements are needed to correctly diagnose and treat patients. Proficiency Testing (PT) programs using modified specimens for testing can be limited because of matrix effects and usage of non-reference measurement procedure (RMP)-defined targets for evaluation. Accuracy-based PT can overcome such limitations; however, there is a lack of information on accuracy-based PT and feasibility of its implementation in evaluation for testosterone measurements. METHODS: Unaltered, single-donor human serum from 2 male and 2 female adult donors were analyzed for testosterone by 142 NYSDH-certified clinical laboratories using 16 immunoassays and LC-MS/MS methods. Testosterone target values were determined using an RMP. RESULTS: The testosterone target concentrations for the 4 specimens were 15.5, 30.0, 402 and 498ng/dl. The biases ranged from -17.8% to 73.1%, 3.1% to 21.3%, -24.8% to 8.6%, and -22.1% to 6.8% for the 4 specimens, respectively. Using a total error target of ±25.1%, which was calculated using the minimum allowable bias and imprecision, 73% of participating laboratories had ≥3 of the 4 results within these limits. CONCLUSIONS: The variability in total testosterone measurements can affect clinical decisions. Accuracy-based PT can significantly contribute to improving testosterone testing by providing reliable data on accuracy in patient care to laboratories, assay manufacturers, and standardization programs.
BACKGROUND: Accurate testosterone measurements are needed to correctly diagnose and treat patients. Proficiency Testing (PT) programs using modified specimens for testing can be limited because of matrix effects and usage of non-reference measurement procedure (RMP)-defined targets for evaluation. Accuracy-based PT can overcome such limitations; however, there is a lack of information on accuracy-based PT and feasibility of its implementation in evaluation for testosterone measurements. METHODS: Unaltered, single-donorhuman serum from 2 male and 2 female adult donors were analyzed for testosterone by 142 NYSDH-certified clinical laboratories using 16 immunoassays and LC-MS/MS methods. Testosterone target values were determined using an RMP. RESULTS: The testosterone target concentrations for the 4 specimens were 15.5, 30.0, 402 and 498ng/dl. The biases ranged from -17.8% to 73.1%, 3.1% to 21.3%, -24.8% to 8.6%, and -22.1% to 6.8% for the 4 specimens, respectively. Using a total error target of ±25.1%, which was calculated using the minimum allowable bias and imprecision, 73% of participating laboratories had ≥3 of the 4 results within these limits. CONCLUSIONS: The variability in total testosterone measurements can affect clinical decisions. Accuracy-based PT can significantly contribute to improving testosterone testing by providing reliable data on accuracy in patient care to laboratories, assay manufacturers, and standardization programs.
Authors: Christina Wang; Don H Catlin; Laurence M Demers; Borislav Starcevic; Ronald S Swerdloff Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Wouter M Tiel Groenestege; Hong N Bui; Joop ten Kate; Paul P C A Menheere; Wytze P Oosterhuis; Huib L Vader; Annemieke C Heijboer; Marcel J W Janssen Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2012-04-26 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Margaret E Wierman; Rosemary Basson; Susan R Davis; Sundeep Khosla; Karen K Miller; William Rosner; Nanette Santoro Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2006-10-03 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Yeo-Min Yun; Julianne Cook Botelho; Donald W Chandler; Alex Katayev; William L Roberts; Frank Z Stanczyk; Hubert W Vesper; Jon M Nakamoto; Luigi Garibaldi; Nigel J Clarke; Robert L Fitzgerald Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2012-10-11 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Laurence Klotz; Bobby Shayegan; Chantal Guillemette; Loretta L Collins; Geoffrey Gotto; Dominique Guérette; Marie-Paule Jammal; Tom Pickles; Patrick O Richard; Fred Saad Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2017-12-19 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Junyan Shi; Rachel Bird; Michael W Schmeling; Andrew N Hoofnagle Journal: J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci Date: 2021-10-04 Impact factor: 3.318
Authors: Letícia Ribeiro Oliveira; Carlos Alberto Longui; Guilherme Guaragna-Filho; José Luiz Costa; Rafael Lanaro; David Antônio Silva; Maria Izabel Chiamolera; Maricilda Palandi de Mello; André Moreno Morcillo; Andrea Trevas Maciel-Guerra; Gil Guerra-Junior Journal: Endocr Connect Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 3.335
Authors: S Cipriani; E Maseroli; V Di Stasi; I Scavello; T Todisco; G Rastrelli; M Fambrini; F Sorbi; F Petraglia; E A Jannini; M Maggi; L Vignozzi Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2021-06-12 Impact factor: 4.256