Literature DB >> 29394087

The College of American Pathologists Biorepository Accreditation Program: Results from the First 5 Years.

Shannon J McCall1, Philip A Branton2, Victoria M Blanc3, Sarah M Dry4, Julie M Gastier-Foster5, James H Harrison6,7, Scott D Jewell8, Rajesh C Dash1, Rebecca C Obeng9, Joan Rose10, Dawna L Mateski10, Albi Liubinskas10, James A Robb11, Nilsa C Ramirez5, Kathi Shea12.   

Abstract

The College of American Pathologists (CAP) developed the Biorepository Accreditation Program (BAP) in 2012. This program integrates best practices from the International Society for Biological and Environmental Biorepositories, the National Cancer Institute, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and the CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program. The goal of this elective program is to provide requirements for standardization in biorepository processes that will result in high-quality specimens that can be used to support research, drug discovery, and personalized medicine. CAP uses a peer inspection model to ensure the inspectors have proper expertise and to promote educational efforts through information sharing. Lead inspectors are comprised of pathologists, PhDs, and managers of biorepositories and they are often supported by CAP staff inspectors. Accreditation is a 3-year continuous cycle of quality with a peer inspection occurring at the start of year 1 and a self-inspection and CAP desk assessment at the start of year 2 and 3. At this time 53 biorepositories are fully CAP BAP accredited and 13 are in the process of obtaining accreditation. There are currently 273 established standards with requirement lists customized based on the scope of activities performed by a biorepository. A total of 90 inspections were completed between May 2012 and December 2016. Sixty-one were initial inspections and 29 were reinspections. A total of 527 deficiencies were identified in the areas of Equipment/Instrumentation (22%), Information Technology (18%), Specimen Handling and QC (15%), Quality Management (16%), Personnel (11%), Safety (10%), Facilities (6%), and Regulatory (2%). Assessment of common deficiencies identifies areas of focus for continuous improvement and educational opportunities. Overall success of the program is high based on the current enrollment of 66 biorepositories, anecdotal participant feedback and increasing national recognition of the BAP in federal documents.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CAP accreditation; CLIA accreditation; biobank; biorepository; preanalytic variables; quality management

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29394087      PMCID: PMC5824654          DOI: 10.1089/bio.2017.0108

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank        ISSN: 1947-5543            Impact factor:   2.300


  8 in total

1.  Medicare, Medicaid, and CLIA programs; laboratory requirements relating to quality systems and certain personnel qualifications. Final rule.

Authors: 
Journal:  Fed Regist       Date:  2003-01-24

2.  Biospecimens and biorepositories for the community pathologist.

Authors:  Rajesh C Dash; James A Robb; David L Booker; Wen-Chi Foo; David L Witte; Lynn Bry
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 5.534

3.  The Canadian Tissue Repository Network Biobank Certification and the College of American Pathologists Biorepository Accreditation Programs: Two Strategies for Knowledge Dissemination in Biobanking.

Authors:  Rebecca O Barnes; Katheryn E Shea; Peter H Watson
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2016-10-14       Impact factor: 2.300

4.  2012 best practices for repositories collection, storage, retrieval, and distribution of biological materials for research international society for biological and environmental repositories.

Authors: 
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 2.300

5.  Development of external quality assurance programs for biorepositories.

Authors:  Kathi Shea; Fay Betsou
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.300

6.  A call to standardize preanalytic data elements for biospecimens.

Authors:  James A Robb; Margaret L Gulley; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Mary F Kennedy; L Mark Cosentino; Kay Washington; Rajesh C Dash; Philip A Branton; Scott D Jewell; Rosanna L Lapham
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2013-08-12       Impact factor: 5.534

Review 7.  International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15189.

Authors:  Frank Schneider; Caroline Maurer; Richard C Friedberg
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 3.464

8.  Biobanking-Budgets and the Role of Pathology Biobanks in Precision Medicine.

Authors:  Chris Andry; Elizabeth Duffy; Christopher A Moskaluk; Shannon McCall; Michael H A Roehrl; Daniel Remick
Journal:  Acad Pathol       Date:  2017-05-08
  8 in total
  7 in total

1.  Expanding Access to Biospecimens for Lyme Disease Test Development.

Authors:  John L Schmitz
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Issues in the Use of Human Tissues to Support Precision Medicine.

Authors:  William E Grizzle
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2019

3.  The place of the bronchoalveolar lavage in the diagnosis of interstitial lung disease: a descriptive and qualitative study.

Authors:  Mona Mlika; Emna Laatar; Emna Braham; Chokri Chebbi; Agnès Hamzaoui; Faouzi Mezni
Journal:  Tunis Med       Date:  2021 Aout

4.  Accuracy of whole slide image based image analysis is adversely affected by preanalytical factors such as stained tissue slide and paraffin block age.

Authors:  Nada Shaker; Ruhani Sardana; Satoshi Hamasaki; David G Nohle; Leona W Ayers; Anil V Parwani
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2022-06-28

5.  The biobank of barretos cancer hospital: 14 years of experience in cancer research.

Authors:  Ana Caroline Neuber; Cássio Hoft Tostes; Adeylson Guimarães Ribeiro; Gabriella Taques Marczynski; Tatiana Takahasi Komoto; Caroline Domingues Rogeri; Vinicius Duval da Silva; Edmundo Carvalho Mauad; Rui Manuel Reis; Márcia M C Marques
Journal:  Cell Tissue Bank       Date:  2021-07-03       Impact factor: 1.522

Review 6.  Mini-Review of Laboratory Operations in Biobanking: Building Biobanking Resources for Translational Research.

Authors:  Mine S Cicek; Janet E Olson
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2020-07-28

Review 7.  Biobanking for Cancer Biomarker Research: Issues and Solutions.

Authors:  Lise A Matzke; Peter H Watson
Journal:  Biomark Insights       Date:  2020-10-19
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.