Statistical Analysis of Monocyte Monolayer Assay Validation in Brazilian Blood Donors

Jéssica Hanser Nunes Kahl, Everaldo José Schorner, E. Kupek
{"title":"Statistical Analysis of Monocyte Monolayer Assay Validation in Brazilian Blood Donors","authors":"Jéssica Hanser Nunes Kahl, Everaldo José Schorner, E. Kupek","doi":"10.9734/ibrr/2023/v14i4316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aims: To validate the monocyte monolayer assay (MMA) technique concerning its suitability for blood donor screening and its cost per test performed. The MMA is an in vitro simulation of the behavior of the antibodies, demonstrating the reactions that would occur in the endothelial reticulum system after a transfusion of incompatible red blood cells, indicating the risk of a hemolytic transfusion reaction and therefore of the clinical significance of the antibodies. \nStudy Design: Blood samples of alloimmunized patients, selected at random from a blood donation bank, were submitted to validation tests recommended by the Brazilian National Health Surveillance Agency for the approval of new testing procedures. \nPlace and Duration of Study: The following Brazilian institutions were involved between June 2009 and July 2010: Immunohematology laboratory of the Hematology and Hemotherapy Center of Santa Catarina state in Florianópolis, Department of Medicine (Medical Unit IV) and Department of Radiology of the Institute of Medical Sciences, Hospital Lahore in São Paulo. \nMethodology: Ninety samples of alloimmunized patients treated by the Santa Catarina blood donors were used. The validation tests evaluated the selectivity, linearity, precision, and accuracy of the MMA method and determined the limits of detection and quantification. External validation of the method was performed by comparing these results with those of an independent laboratory in São Paulo, while making sure that the latter was blind to the results of the former. The coefficient of variation was used to express the MMA testing precision of 5 replicates across 5 different concentration levels. Type I error for evaluating statistical significance was set at 5%. \nResults: Selectivity assessment of the impact of multiple alloantibodies on the MMA test result showed no statistically significant difference (P>0.05) across the titers of 64, 256, and 2048, each with three replications, thus confirming the test specificity. Homoscedasticity of the monocyte index (MI) data was not refuted by Levine's test with the F-value of 0.746, much below the value of 3.056 needed to achieve a statistical significance level of P<0.05. MI linearity against the logarithm of the alloantibody concentration was shown in a simple linear regression where the latter predicted 83% of the variation in the former, and the regression slope of 0.4 (95% confidence interval 0.32, 0.48). The limits of detection and quantification on the logarithm scale were 0.28 and 0.84, respectively. External validation found no statistically significant difference between the MMA test results from the two independent laboratories. The coefficient of variation of <15% indicated good MMA testing precision under routine laboratory conditions. \nConclusion: The assay met all validation criteria and was therefore effective in assessing the clinical significance of alloantibodies.","PeriodicalId":249518,"journal":{"name":"International Blood Research &amp; Reviews","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Blood Research &amp; Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9734/ibrr/2023/v14i4316","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: To validate the monocyte monolayer assay (MMA) technique concerning its suitability for blood donor screening and its cost per test performed. The MMA is an in vitro simulation of the behavior of the antibodies, demonstrating the reactions that would occur in the endothelial reticulum system after a transfusion of incompatible red blood cells, indicating the risk of a hemolytic transfusion reaction and therefore of the clinical significance of the antibodies. Study Design: Blood samples of alloimmunized patients, selected at random from a blood donation bank, were submitted to validation tests recommended by the Brazilian National Health Surveillance Agency for the approval of new testing procedures. Place and Duration of Study: The following Brazilian institutions were involved between June 2009 and July 2010: Immunohematology laboratory of the Hematology and Hemotherapy Center of Santa Catarina state in Florianópolis, Department of Medicine (Medical Unit IV) and Department of Radiology of the Institute of Medical Sciences, Hospital Lahore in São Paulo. Methodology: Ninety samples of alloimmunized patients treated by the Santa Catarina blood donors were used. The validation tests evaluated the selectivity, linearity, precision, and accuracy of the MMA method and determined the limits of detection and quantification. External validation of the method was performed by comparing these results with those of an independent laboratory in São Paulo, while making sure that the latter was blind to the results of the former. The coefficient of variation was used to express the MMA testing precision of 5 replicates across 5 different concentration levels. Type I error for evaluating statistical significance was set at 5%. Results: Selectivity assessment of the impact of multiple alloantibodies on the MMA test result showed no statistically significant difference (P>0.05) across the titers of 64, 256, and 2048, each with three replications, thus confirming the test specificity. Homoscedasticity of the monocyte index (MI) data was not refuted by Levine's test with the F-value of 0.746, much below the value of 3.056 needed to achieve a statistical significance level of P<0.05. MI linearity against the logarithm of the alloantibody concentration was shown in a simple linear regression where the latter predicted 83% of the variation in the former, and the regression slope of 0.4 (95% confidence interval 0.32, 0.48). The limits of detection and quantification on the logarithm scale were 0.28 and 0.84, respectively. External validation found no statistically significant difference between the MMA test results from the two independent laboratories. The coefficient of variation of <15% indicated good MMA testing precision under routine laboratory conditions. Conclusion: The assay met all validation criteria and was therefore effective in assessing the clinical significance of alloantibodies.
巴西献血者单核细胞单层检测验证统计分析
目的:验证单核细胞单层检测(MMA)技术是否适合献血者筛查以及每次检测的成本。MMA 是对抗体行为的体外模拟,展示了不相容红细胞输血后在内皮网状系统中发生的反应,显示了溶血性输血反应的风险,因此也显示了抗体的临床意义。研究设计:从献血库中随机抽取异体免疫患者的血样,并按照巴西国家卫生监督局的建议进行验证测试,以批准新的测试程序。研究地点和时间:2009 年 6 月至 2010 年 7 月期间,以下巴西机构参与了研究:位于弗洛里亚诺波利斯的圣卡塔琳娜州血液学和血液治疗中心免疫血液学实验室、圣保罗拉合尔医院医学科学研究所医学部(第四医疗组)和放射部。研究方法使用圣卡塔琳娜州献血者治疗的 90 例异体免疫患者样本。验证试验评估了 MMA 方法的选择性、线性、精确性和准确性,并确定了检测和定量限。该方法的外部验证是将这些结果与圣保罗一家独立实验室的结果进行比较,同时确保后者对前者的结果视而不见。变异系数用于表示 5 个不同浓度水平的 5 个重复样品的 MMA 检测精度。评估统计显著性的 I 类误差设定为 5%。结果多重同种抗体对 MMA 检测结果影响的选择性评估显示,在滴度为 64、256 和 2048 的情况下,每个滴度重复三次,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),从而证实了检测的特异性。单核细胞指数(MI)数据的同方差性未被 Levine 检验反驳,F 值为 0.746,远低于达到 P<0.05 统计显著性水平所需的 3.056 值。MI 与同种抗体浓度对数的线性关系表现在简单的线性回归中,后者预测了前者变化的 83%,回归斜率为 0.4(95% 置信区间为 0.32,0.48)。检测和定量的对数界限分别为 0.28 和 0.84。外部验证发现,两个独立实验室的 MMA 检测结果在统计学上没有显著差异。变异系数小于 15%,表明在常规实验室条件下 MMA 检测具有良好的精确性。结论该检测方法符合所有验证标准,因此能有效评估异体抗体的临床意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信