Analytical performance validation of a coronary heart disease risk assessment multi-analyte proteomic test.

Expert opinion on medical diagnostics Pub Date : 2013-03-01 Epub Date: 2012-12-11 DOI:10.1517/17530059.2013.753055
Niamh Nolan, Lilian Tee, Swathi Vijayakumar, Ivana Burazor, Evangelos Hytopoulos, William H Biggs, Michael Beggs, Cynthia French, Douglas S Harrington
{"title":"Analytical performance validation of a coronary heart disease risk assessment multi-analyte proteomic test.","authors":"Niamh Nolan,&nbsp;Lilian Tee,&nbsp;Swathi Vijayakumar,&nbsp;Ivana Burazor,&nbsp;Evangelos Hytopoulos,&nbsp;William H Biggs,&nbsp;Michael Beggs,&nbsp;Cynthia French,&nbsp;Douglas S Harrington","doi":"10.1517/17530059.2013.753055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Coronary heart disease (CHD) remains prevalent despite efforts to improve CHD risk assessment. The authors developed a multi-analyte immunoassay-based CHD risk assessment (CHDRA) algorithm, clinically validated in a multicenter study, to improve CHDRA in intermediate risk individuals.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Clinical laboratory validation of the CHDRA biomarker assays' analytical performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Multiplexed immunoassay panels developed for the seven CHDRA assays were evaluated with donor sera in a clinical laboratory. Specificity, sensitivity, interfering substances and reproducibility of the CHDRA assays, along with the effects of pre-analytical specimen processing, were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analytical measurements of the CHDRA panel proteins (CTACK, Eotaxin, Fas Ligand, HGF, IL-16, MCP-3 and sFas) exhibited acceptable accuracy (80 - 120%), cross-reactivity (< 1%), interference (< 30% at high concentrations of bilirubin, lipids, hemoglobin and HAMA), sensitivity and reproducibility (< 20% CV across multiple runs, operators and instruments). Recoveries from donor sera subjected to typical clinical laboratory pre-analytical conditions were within 80 - 120%. The pre-analytical variables did not substantively impact the CHDRA scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The CHDRA panel analytical validation in a clinical laboratory meets or exceeds the specifications established during the clinical utility studies. Risk score reproducibility across multiple test scenarios suggests the assays are not susceptible to clinical laboratory pre-analytical and analytical variation.</p>","PeriodicalId":72996,"journal":{"name":"Expert opinion on medical diagnostics","volume":"7 2","pages":"127-36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1517/17530059.2013.753055","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert opinion on medical diagnostics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1517/17530059.2013.753055","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/12/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Background: Coronary heart disease (CHD) remains prevalent despite efforts to improve CHD risk assessment. The authors developed a multi-analyte immunoassay-based CHD risk assessment (CHDRA) algorithm, clinically validated in a multicenter study, to improve CHDRA in intermediate risk individuals.

Objective: Clinical laboratory validation of the CHDRA biomarker assays' analytical performance.

Methods: Multiplexed immunoassay panels developed for the seven CHDRA assays were evaluated with donor sera in a clinical laboratory. Specificity, sensitivity, interfering substances and reproducibility of the CHDRA assays, along with the effects of pre-analytical specimen processing, were evaluated.

Results: Analytical measurements of the CHDRA panel proteins (CTACK, Eotaxin, Fas Ligand, HGF, IL-16, MCP-3 and sFas) exhibited acceptable accuracy (80 - 120%), cross-reactivity (< 1%), interference (< 30% at high concentrations of bilirubin, lipids, hemoglobin and HAMA), sensitivity and reproducibility (< 20% CV across multiple runs, operators and instruments). Recoveries from donor sera subjected to typical clinical laboratory pre-analytical conditions were within 80 - 120%. The pre-analytical variables did not substantively impact the CHDRA scores.

Conclusions: The CHDRA panel analytical validation in a clinical laboratory meets or exceeds the specifications established during the clinical utility studies. Risk score reproducibility across multiple test scenarios suggests the assays are not susceptible to clinical laboratory pre-analytical and analytical variation.

冠心病风险评估多分析物蛋白质组学试验的分析性能验证。
背景:尽管人们努力改善冠心病的风险评估,但冠心病(CHD)仍然普遍存在。作者开发了一种基于多分析物免疫测定的冠心病风险评估(CHDRA)算法,该算法在一项多中心研究中得到临床验证,以改善中度风险个体的CHDRA。目的:临床实验室验证CHDRA生物标志物分析方法的分析性能。方法:在临床实验室用供者血清评估用于7种CHDRA检测的多重免疫测定板。评估了CHDRA分析的特异性、敏感性、干扰物质和再现性,以及分析前样品处理的影响。结果:CHDRA面板蛋白(CTACK、Eotaxin、Fas配体、HGF、IL-16、MCP-3和sFas)的分析测量显示出可接受的准确性(80 - 120%)、交叉反应性(< 1%)、干扰(高浓度胆红素、脂质、血红蛋白和HAMA < 30%)、灵敏度和重复性(跨多个运行、操作人员和仪器的CV < 20%)。在典型的临床实验室前分析条件下,供体血清的回收率在80 - 120%之间。分析前变量对CHDRA评分没有实质性影响。结论:临床实验室的CHDRA小组分析验证符合或超过临床效用研究期间建立的规范。风险评分在多个测试场景中的可重复性表明,检测方法不容易受到临床实验室分析前和分析变化的影响。
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