Principles of Analytic Validation of Immunohistochemical Assays: Guideline Update.

Jeffrey D Goldsmith, Megan L Troxell, Sinchita Roy-Chowdhuri, Carol F Colasacco, Mary Elizabeth Edgerton, Patrick L Fitzgibbons, Regan Fulton, Thomas Haas, Patricia L Kandalaft, Tanja Kalicanin, Christina Lacchetti, Patti Loykasek, Nicole E Thomas, Paul E Swanson, Andrew M Bellizzi
{"title":"Principles of Analytic Validation of Immunohistochemical Assays: Guideline Update.","authors":"Jeffrey D Goldsmith, Megan L Troxell, Sinchita Roy-Chowdhuri, Carol F Colasacco, Mary Elizabeth Edgerton, Patrick L Fitzgibbons, Regan Fulton, Thomas Haas, Patricia L Kandalaft, Tanja Kalicanin, Christina Lacchetti, Patti Loykasek, Nicole E Thomas, Paul E Swanson, Andrew M Bellizzi","doi":"10.5858/arpa.2023-0483-CP","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context.—: </strong>In 2014, the College of American Pathologists developed an evidence-based guideline to address analytic validation of immunohistochemical assays. Fourteen recommendations were offered. Per the National Academy of Medicine standards for developing trustworthy guidelines, guidelines should be updated when new evidence suggests modifications.</p><p><strong>Objective.—: </strong>To assess evidence published since the release of the original guideline and develop updated evidence-based recommendations.</p><p><strong>Design.—: </strong>The College of American Pathologists convened an expert panel to perform a systematic review of the literature and update the original guideline recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.</p><p><strong>Results.—: </strong>Two strong recommendations, 1 conditional recommendation, and 12 good practice statements are offered in this updated guideline. They address analytic validation or verification of predictive and nonpredictive assays, and recommended revalidation procedures following changes in assay conditions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions.—: </strong>While many of the original guideline statements remain similar, new recommendations address analytic validation of assays with distinct scoring systems, such as programmed death receptor-1 and analytic verification of US Food and Drug Administration approved/cleared assays; more specific guidance is offered for validating immunohistochemistry performed on cytology specimens.</p>","PeriodicalId":93883,"journal":{"name":"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2023-0483-CP","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

Context.—: In 2014, the College of American Pathologists developed an evidence-based guideline to address analytic validation of immunohistochemical assays. Fourteen recommendations were offered. Per the National Academy of Medicine standards for developing trustworthy guidelines, guidelines should be updated when new evidence suggests modifications.

Objective.—: To assess evidence published since the release of the original guideline and develop updated evidence-based recommendations.

Design.—: The College of American Pathologists convened an expert panel to perform a systematic review of the literature and update the original guideline recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

Results.—: Two strong recommendations, 1 conditional recommendation, and 12 good practice statements are offered in this updated guideline. They address analytic validation or verification of predictive and nonpredictive assays, and recommended revalidation procedures following changes in assay conditions.

Conclusions.—: While many of the original guideline statements remain similar, new recommendations address analytic validation of assays with distinct scoring systems, such as programmed death receptor-1 and analytic verification of US Food and Drug Administration approved/cleared assays; more specific guidance is offered for validating immunohistochemistry performed on cytology specimens.

免疫组化测定的分析验证原则:指南更新。
背景2014 年,美国病理学家学会制定了一份循证指南,以解决免疫组化测定的分析验证问题。该指南提出了 14 项建议。根据美国国家医学院制定值得信赖的指南的标准,当有新证据表明需要修改时,指南应及时更新:评估自原始指南发布以来公布的证据,并制定基于证据的最新建议:美国病理学家学会召集了一个专家小组,对文献进行了系统回顾,并采用建议分级评估、发展和评价方法更新了最初的指南建议:结果:本更新指南提出了 2 项强烈建议、1 项有条件建议和 12 项良好实践声明。它们涉及预测性和非预测性化验的分析验证或核实,以及化验条件发生变化后的建议重新验证程序:结论:虽然许多原有的指南声明仍然相似,但新的建议涉及对程序性死亡受体-1等具有不同评分系统的检测方法进行分析验证,以及对美国食品药品管理局批准/许可的检测方法进行分析验证;为验证细胞学标本上进行的免疫组化提供了更具体的指导。
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