Klee, George G.

Abstract Context. —As part of a College of American Pathologists (CAP) proficiency testing survey, a comparison is made between human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) results from an actual patient pool and a similarly targeted artificial sample. The goal is to gain insight into the possible source(s) of bias attributable to the proficiency testing material (PTM) with a view toward creating more appropriate survey materials. Objective. —To compare hCG and related variants in a pool of fresh frozen sera (FFS) with that found in PTM. Design. —The 2003 CAP K/KN-A Survey included a FFS specimen along with admixtures of PTM. The FFS (K-02) and 1 PTM admixture (K-01) had similar mean hCG values. Five hCG-related analytes were measured on these 2 samples by a reference laboratory. Participants. —Approximately 1800 clinical laboratories and diagnostic test kit manufacturers participated in the K/ KN-A Survey. Main Outcome Measures. —Method imprecision (coefficient of variation) and method bias (relative difference between peer group mean and all-method median) were computed for the 2 samples. Differences were evaluated with respect to hCG-related analytes levels. Results. —All-method hCG results were 12.9 mIU/mL (12.9 IU/L) for the PTM material and 21.6 mIU/mL (21.6 IU/L) for the FFS material. Method biases for 14 manufacturers were greater for PTM than for FFS (−40% to +35% and −16% to +23%). Twelve of 14 methods had higher coefficients of variation on PTM. Total hCG and free β hCG measurements by the reference laboratory were 14.1 mIU/ mL (14.1 IU/L) for the PTM material and 18.5 mIU/mL (18.5 U/L) for the FFS material (FFS), and 2.4 (PTM) and 0.7 (FFS) mIU/mL (2.4 and 0.7 IU/L), respectively. On a molar basis, free β represented 17% and 4% of the total hCG, respectively. Levels of hyperglycosylated hCG, nicked hCG, and β core fragment were not measurable in either sample. Conclusions. —It is unlikely that the hCG added to the PTM is the source of the increased bias and variability. The main difference is a 3-fold increase in free β found in the PTM, but methods previously found to strongly react with free β were not systematically elevated. The biases between manufacturers found for the FFS specimen are likely attributable to calibration differences.

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.

Abstract Assays are now available that can measure very low concentrations of prostate-specific antigen (PSA), but their analytic performance and clinical utility are not well defined. This brief article highlights some of the clinical issues related to the limited prognostic significance of small changes in PSA concentrations in men with prostate cancer who have been treated with prostate ablation therapy. College of American Pathologists proficiency survey data are presented, illustrating the performance of commercial PSA assays with low PSA concentration survey samples tested between 1998 and 2002. The performance of the assays appears to be improving, but many of the currently used assays have intralaboratory coefficients of variation greater than 20% for PSA concentrations less than 0.4 ng/mL. Also, there are major differences in the level of PSA reported by various assays in these low concentration samples. These level differences (if they are also seen in clinical samples) may cause clinical problems when fixed serum PSA thresholds (eg, 0.2 ng/mL) are used to make clinical decisions related to prostate tumor recurrence.

Abstract Context. —There are 2 general types of assays measuring MUC1 gene–derived glycoprotein: assays for cancer antigen (CA) 15-3, which are sandwich assays, and assays for CA 27.29, which are competitive assays. These 2 types of assays measure slightly different parts of this tandem-repeat molecule. Across-method assay differences hinder the exchange of patient test values among integrated health care networks and among countries. Objective. —This report evaluates the method differences among these assays to determine if the differences between these assays are mainly related to variations in calibration or differences in analyte specificity. Design. —Data from 22 College of American Pathologists survey challenges were analyzed to compare 10 commercial assay methods for these 2 related analytes. In addition, data from 58 patient samples were analyzed to compare 3 of these assays. Results. —The linear correlation coefficients comparing the within-method medians of these proficiency test distributions were very high (>0.99) for all of the methods; however, the regression slopes varied from 0.836 to 1.095. The regression slopes for the patient specimens varied similarly, but the correlation coefficients were lower. Conclusions. —This study indicates that many of the test value differences for these measurements are due to differences in assay calibration rather than differences in the specificity of the assay measurement systems. Survey test data potentially could be used to help harmonize these assay differences.

Abstract Human anti-mouse antibodies (HAMA) are human immunoglobulins with specificity for mouse immunoglobulins. This topic currently is of interest because of the increased use of monoclonal mouse antibodies as diagnostic reagents both for in vitro laboratory measurements and for in vivo imaging studies. Monoclonal mouse antibodies also are being used therapeutically. This short article reviews the production of HAMA in patients receiving monoclonal antibodies and illustrates the potential ways that HAMA can interfere with immunoassay measurements. Methods for measuring and neutralizing HAMA also are discussed.

Abstract Objective.—To identify the sources of analytical variation for cyclosporine and tacrolimus in a 3-year longitudinal study. Design.—Two pools of whole blood were spiked with cyclosporine and tacrolimus, respectively. One aliquot of cyclosporine and 2 of the tacrolimus pool were distributed in the first and last mailing for years 1999 to 2001. For both drugs, the total variance for each method was partitioned into within- and between-laboratory components. Setting.—The A and C mailings of the 1999, 2000, and 2001 AACC/CAP [American Association for Clinical Chemistry/College of American Pathologists] Immunosuppressive Drugs (CS) Monitoring Survey. Main Outcome Measures.—For each drug, total variance was partitioned into specimen, mailing, year, and interlaboratory effects for each analytical method. Participants.—The 292 laboratories for cyclosporine and 177 laboratories for tacrolimus enrolled in the survey from 1999 to 2001. Results.—For both cyclosporine and tacrolimus, the major source of imprecision came from within-laboratory factors, which accounted for nearly 85% (range, 77% to 90%) of the total variance. For cyclosporine, the major component of within-laboratory variance was between-mailing, within-year effect, whereas for tacrolimus it was the between-year, within-laboratory variation. Conclusion.—The major source of long-term survey imprecision for cyclosporine and tacrolimus is within-laboratory factors. The finding that 85% of the total variance was due to within-laboratory variation is similar to other therapeutic drugs.