College of American Pathologists Quality Cross Check -Chemistry and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring as a tool for biannual instrument correlations.

Megan S Pater, Júlia A Hernandez, Joesph R Wiencek
{"title":"College of American Pathologists Quality Cross Check -Chemistry and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring as a tool for biannual instrument correlations.","authors":"Megan S Pater, Júlia A Hernandez, Joesph R Wiencek","doi":"10.1093/labmed/lmad111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Biannual instrument-correlation studies are required for nonwaived assays performed on multiple instruments.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the feasibility of using College of American Pathologists (CAP) Quality Cross Check-Chemistry and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (CZQ) to assess instrument correlations among multiple analyzers, analyzer models, and Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) licenses for 55 unique analytes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Instrument correlation studies were performed on 9 Abbott ARCHITECT instruments (c4000 [n = 4], c8000 [n = 2], and c16000 [n = 3]) over 3 CLIA licenses using CZQ materials. The mean (SD) values, concentration difference, percent bias, and peer data for each individual level of CZQ were determined for each individual analyzer. Acceptable concentration and percentage for each analyte were set using criteria from CAP or other reputable sources such as the American Association of Bioanalysts or the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia. Peer data were provided by CAP with the CZQ kit.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Correlations using CZQ materials showed that 94.5% of assays studied were within the acceptability criteria by percent bias only and 98.2% were within acceptability criteria by concentration difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of CZQ provides support to standardized correlation studies among instruments within and across separate CLIA licenses. However, widespread adoption of CZQ may be limited due to concerns regarding matrix effects, analyte ranges, and ease of data analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":94124,"journal":{"name":"Laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":"460-463"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmad111","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

Background: Biannual instrument-correlation studies are required for nonwaived assays performed on multiple instruments.

Objective: To determine the feasibility of using College of American Pathologists (CAP) Quality Cross Check-Chemistry and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (CZQ) to assess instrument correlations among multiple analyzers, analyzer models, and Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) licenses for 55 unique analytes.

Methods: Instrument correlation studies were performed on 9 Abbott ARCHITECT instruments (c4000 [n = 4], c8000 [n = 2], and c16000 [n = 3]) over 3 CLIA licenses using CZQ materials. The mean (SD) values, concentration difference, percent bias, and peer data for each individual level of CZQ were determined for each individual analyzer. Acceptable concentration and percentage for each analyte were set using criteria from CAP or other reputable sources such as the American Association of Bioanalysts or the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia. Peer data were provided by CAP with the CZQ kit.

Results: Correlations using CZQ materials showed that 94.5% of assays studied were within the acceptability criteria by percent bias only and 98.2% were within acceptability criteria by concentration difference.

Conclusions: The use of CZQ provides support to standardized correlation studies among instruments within and across separate CLIA licenses. However, widespread adoption of CZQ may be limited due to concerns regarding matrix effects, analyte ranges, and ease of data analysis.

美国病理学家学会质量交叉检查--化学和治疗药物监测,作为半年一次的仪器关联工具。
背景:对于在多台仪器上进行的非豁免检测,需要每半年进行一次仪器相关性研究:目的:确定使用美国病理学家学会(CAP)质量交叉检查--化学和治疗药物监测(CZQ)来评估多台分析仪、分析仪型号和临床实验室改进修正案(CLIA)许可中 55 种独特分析物的仪器相关性的可行性:使用 CZQ 材料在 3 个 CLIA 许可证的 9 台雅培 ARCHITECT 仪器(c4000 [n = 4]、c8000 [n = 2] 和 c16000 [n = 3])上进行了仪器相关性研究。为每台分析仪确定了 CZQ 每个级别的平均值(SD)、浓度差、偏差百分比和同行数据。每种分析物的可接受浓度和百分比都是根据 CAP 或其他著名来源(如美国生物分析师协会或澳大拉西亚皇家病理学家学院)的标准确定的。同行数据由 CAP 随 CZQ 试剂盒提供:结果:使用 CZQ 材料进行的相关性分析表明,94.5% 的化验结果符合仅按百分比偏差计算的可接受性标准,98.2% 的化验结果符合按浓度差异计算的可接受性标准:结论:CZQ 的使用为在 CLIA 许可范围内和不同许可范围内进行仪器间标准化相关性研究提供了支持。然而,由于基质效应、分析物范围和数据分析难易程度等方面的问题,CZQ 的广泛应用可能会受到限制。
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