Winter, William E.

Abstract Context. —In proficiency testing surveys, there are differences in the values reported by users of various analytic methods. Two contributors to this variation are calibrator bias and matrix effects of proficiency testing materials. Objectives. —(1) To quantify the biases of the analytic methods used to measure thyroid-stimulating hormone, thyroxine, triiodothyronine, free thyroxine, and free triiodothyronine levels; (2) to determine if these biases are within allowable limits; and (3) to ascertain if proficiency testing materials correctly identify these biases. Design. —A fresh frozen serum specimen was mailed as part of the 2003 College of American Pathologists Ligand and Chemistry surveys. The means and SDs for each analytic method were determined for this sample as well as for a proficiency testing sample from both surveys. In the fresh frozen serum sample, target values for thyroxine and triiodothyronine were determined by isotope dilution/liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. All other target values in the study were the median of the means obtained for the various analytic methods. Main Outcome Measures. —Calibration biases were calculated by comparing the mean of each analytic method with the appropriate target values. These biases were evaluated against limits based on intra- and interindividual biological variation. Matrix effects of proficiency testing materials were assessed by comparing the rank of highest to lowest analytic method means (Spearman rank test) for each analyte. Participants. —Approximately 3900 clinical laboratories were enrolled in the College of American Pathologists Chemistry and Ligand surveys. Results. —The number of methods in the Ligand Survey that failed to meet the goals for bias was 7 of 17 for thyroid-stimulating hormone and 11 of 13 for free thyroxine. The failure rates were 12 of 16 methods for thyroxine, 8 of 11 for triiodothyronine, and 9 of 11 for free triiodothyronine. The means of the analytic method for the proficiency testing material correlated significantly ( P < .05) only with the fresh frozen serum means for thyroxine and thyroid-stimulating hormone in the Chemistry Survey and free triiodothyronine in the Ligand Survey. Conclusions. —A majority of the methods used in thyroid function testing have biases that limit their clinical utility. Traditional proficiency testing materials do not adequately reflect these biases.

Abstract Context. —The College of American Pathologists (CAP) provides proficiency testing (PT) surveys to laboratories around the world. Objectives. —To compare diagnostic assay methods for serum/plasma cortisol and immunoglobulin (Ig) E in terms of their bias and precision, to determine how well CAP PT specimens simulate human serum, and to reassess proficiency test grading criteria in light of these findings. Design. —A participant-blinded, prospective trial. One vial of pooled fresh frozen serum (FFS) and 4 different admixtures of PT material (PTM) were sent to laboratories participating in PT surveys. Participants. —Laboratories providing cortisol (>1000) or IgE (>230) results among the subscribers to the CAP surveys, Ligand (General) 2003, set K/KN-A and Chemistry 2003, set C-C. Main Outcome Measures. —The main outcome measures were (1) bias among laboratories using the same method (peer groups), defined relative to the median of method means (MedMM); (2) imprecision as measured by the SD and coefficient of variation (CV) about each method mean; and (3) total error across laboratories for the FFS cortisol results, defined as |Bias Relative to Reference Method| + 2 SD. Results. —Cortisol method biases, relative to MedMM, ranged from −22% to 9% for the FFS challenge and from −24% to 36% for comparable PTM challenges. The method biases, relative to the reference method, ranged from −3% to 19% for the FFS challenge. The cortisol method CVs ranged from 4.2% to 13.6% for the FFS challenge and from 4.7% to 12.7% for comparable PTM challenges. Total error across laboratories ranged from 1.4 to 6.9 μg/dL (39 to 190 nmol/L) for the FFS challenge. Immunoglobulin E method biases, relative to MedMM, ranged from −8% to 9% for the FFS challenge and from −7% to 5% for comparable PTM challenges. The IgE method CVs ranged from 3.6% to 6.7% for the FFS challenge and from 3.4% to 9.8% for comparable PTM challenges. Conclusions. —The bias for cortisol results was less with FFS than with PTM, but imprecision was comparable. The FFS MedMM was 8.5% higher than the reference value. Fresh frozen serum and PTM bias and imprecision for IgE methods were each less than 10%. Because some of the methods demonstrated greater bias when analyzing PTM than FFS, peer group grading of both these analytes is appropriate.