A Parametric Empirical Bayes Approach to Personalized Reference Intervals and Reference Change Values

IF 6.3 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Eirik Åsen Røys, Kristin Viste, Christopher-John Farrell, Ralf Kellmann, Bashir Alaour, Marit Sverresdotter Sylte, Janniche Torsvik, Heidi Strand, Michael Marber, Torbjørn Omland, Elvar Theodorsson, Graham Ross Dallas Jones, Kristin Moberg Aakre
{"title":"A Parametric Empirical Bayes Approach to Personalized Reference Intervals and Reference Change Values","authors":"Eirik Åsen Røys, Kristin Viste, Christopher-John Farrell, Ralf Kellmann, Bashir Alaour, Marit Sverresdotter Sylte, Janniche Torsvik, Heidi Strand, Michael Marber, Torbjørn Omland, Elvar Theodorsson, Graham Ross Dallas Jones, Kristin Moberg Aakre","doi":"10.1093/clinchem/hvaf092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Population-wide reference intervals (RIpop) are commonly used in laboratory medicine but may not reflect an individual’s tightly regulated homeostatic interval. Personalized reference intervals (RIper) could enhance diagnostic precision by accounting for individual variability. A parametric empirical Bayes (PEB) framework stabilizes individual estimates using population parameters, enabling reliable RIper even from a limited number of individual results. Methods We applied the PEB framework to estimate RIper for 9 biomarkers: albumin, creatinine, phosphate, cortisone, cortisol, testosterone, androstenedione, 17-hydroxyprogesterone, and 11-deoxycortisol. The PEB parameters tested were derived from both routine Laboratory Information System (LIS) data and a local biological variation (BV) study. Using serial samples from healthy adults, we assessed the proportion of results flagged with a 95% prediction interval and compared RIper to conventional RIpop and reference change values (RCVs). Results LIS parameters were based on data from 1986 to 185 488 patients. PEB-based RIper were consistently narrower than RIpop while maintaining or reducing the proportion of flagged results. For example, albumin flagging decreased from 4.7% (RIpop) to 0.3% (RIper), phosphate from 5.4% to 3.7%, and cortisone from 7.1% to 3.9%. Conversely, 17-hydroxyprogesterone increased from 0.0% to 5.5% but remained close to the expected 5%. PEB thresholds were narrower than standard RCV estimates by correcting for regression toward the mean without increasing flagged results. Conclusions The PEB framework effectively provides personalized cutoffs for laboratory tests even when few individual patient results are available. PEB parameters can be established using LIS or BV data, offering a feasible and cost-effective implementation pathway.","PeriodicalId":10690,"journal":{"name":"Clinical chemistry","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvaf092","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Population-wide reference intervals (RIpop) are commonly used in laboratory medicine but may not reflect an individual’s tightly regulated homeostatic interval. Personalized reference intervals (RIper) could enhance diagnostic precision by accounting for individual variability. A parametric empirical Bayes (PEB) framework stabilizes individual estimates using population parameters, enabling reliable RIper even from a limited number of individual results. Methods We applied the PEB framework to estimate RIper for 9 biomarkers: albumin, creatinine, phosphate, cortisone, cortisol, testosterone, androstenedione, 17-hydroxyprogesterone, and 11-deoxycortisol. The PEB parameters tested were derived from both routine Laboratory Information System (LIS) data and a local biological variation (BV) study. Using serial samples from healthy adults, we assessed the proportion of results flagged with a 95% prediction interval and compared RIper to conventional RIpop and reference change values (RCVs). Results LIS parameters were based on data from 1986 to 185 488 patients. PEB-based RIper were consistently narrower than RIpop while maintaining or reducing the proportion of flagged results. For example, albumin flagging decreased from 4.7% (RIpop) to 0.3% (RIper), phosphate from 5.4% to 3.7%, and cortisone from 7.1% to 3.9%. Conversely, 17-hydroxyprogesterone increased from 0.0% to 5.5% but remained close to the expected 5%. PEB thresholds were narrower than standard RCV estimates by correcting for regression toward the mean without increasing flagged results. Conclusions The PEB framework effectively provides personalized cutoffs for laboratory tests even when few individual patient results are available. PEB parameters can be established using LIS or BV data, offering a feasible and cost-effective implementation pathway.
个性化参考区间和参考变化值的参数化经验贝叶斯方法
背景:全民参考区间(RIpop)常用于检验医学,但可能不能反映个体严格调节的体内平衡区间。个性化参考区间(RIper)可以通过考虑个体差异来提高诊断精度。参数经验贝叶斯(PEB)框架使用总体参数稳定个体估计,即使从有限数量的个体结果中也能实现可靠的RIper。方法应用PEB框架估计RIper中9种生物标志物:白蛋白、肌酐、磷酸盐、可的松、皮质醇、睾酮、雄烯二酮、17-羟基孕酮和11-脱氧皮质醇。测试的PEB参数来自常规实验室信息系统(LIS)数据和当地生物变异(BV)研究。使用健康成人的连续样本,我们评估了标记为95%预测区间的结果的比例,并将RIper与常规RIpop和参考变化值(rcv)进行了比较。结果LIS参数基于1986 ~ 185488例患者的数据。基于peb的RIper始终比RIpop更窄,同时保持或减少了标记结果的比例。例如,白蛋白标记从4.7% (RIpop)降至0.3% (RIper),磷酸盐从5.4%降至3.7%,可的松从7.1%降至3.9%。相反,17-羟孕酮从0.0%增加到5.5%,但仍接近预期的5%。PEB阈值比标准RCV估计值窄,校正了向均值回归而没有增加标记结果。结论:PEB框架有效地为实验室检测提供了个性化的截止点,即使个别患者的结果很少。利用LIS或BV数据可以建立PEB参数,提供了一种可行且经济有效的实施途径。
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
Clinical chemistry
Clinical chemistry 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
212
审稿时长
1.7 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Chemistry is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that is the premier publication for the science and practice of clinical laboratory medicine. It was established in 1955 and is associated with the Association for Diagnostics & Laboratory Medicine (ADLM). The journal focuses on laboratory diagnosis and management of patients, and has expanded to include other clinical laboratory disciplines such as genomics, hematology, microbiology, and toxicology. It also publishes articles relevant to clinical specialties including cardiology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, genetics, immunology, infectious diseases, maternal-fetal medicine, neurology, nutrition, oncology, and pediatrics. In addition to original research, editorials, and reviews, Clinical Chemistry features recurring sections such as clinical case studies, perspectives, podcasts, and Q&A articles. It has the highest impact factor among journals of clinical chemistry, laboratory medicine, pathology, analytical chemistry, transfusion medicine, and clinical microbiology. The journal is indexed in databases such as MEDLINE and Web of Science.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信