{"title":"Evaluation of a faecal calprotectin method using the OC-SENSOR PLEDIA","authors":"S. O’Driscoll, C. Piggott, S. Benton","doi":"10.1515/cclm-2022-0126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objectives The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends faecal calprotectin (f-cal) to help differentiate inflammatory bowel diseases from irritable bowel syndrome. Faecal samples for calprotectin have historically been collected at home by patients into screw-top pots and sent to laboratories where calprotectin is extracted and analysed. Faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) samples are collected at home into specific collection devices containing stabilising buffer. We evaluated the OC-FCa method for f-cal, developed by Eiken Chemical Co., Ltd. (Japan) that uses the same collection device and analyser as f-Hb. Methods OC-FCa was assessed for limit of blank (LOB), limit of detection (LOD), limit of quantification (LOQ), within and between-run imprecision, linearity, prozone, recovery and carryover. A method comparison against the BÜHLMANN fCAL® turbo (BÜHLMANN Laboratories AG, Switzerland) was performed using patient samples and EQA. Results The LOB was 3 µg calprotectin/g faeces (µg/g), LOD 8 μg/g and LOQ 20 μg/g. Within and between-run imprecision was <5%; linearity was good (R2 > 0.99); prozone was appropriately detected; recovery was 99.6%; no observed carryover. OC-FCa showed a strong positive bias compared with BÜHLMANN fCAL® turbo (Z=−5.3587, p < 0.001). When categorised using our local pathway, which interprets calprotectin concentrations and need for further investigation, Cohen’s Kappa demonstrates substantial agreement at <50 μg/g (κ=0.80) and >150 μg/g (κ=0.63) and fair agreement (κ=0.22) in the borderline category 50–150 μg/g. Conclusions The OC-FCa method performed well in the evaluation. With the lack of standardisation for f-cal a clinical study is required to evaluate the positive bias and establish suitable cut-off levels.","PeriodicalId":10388,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2022-0126","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Abstract Objectives The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends faecal calprotectin (f-cal) to help differentiate inflammatory bowel diseases from irritable bowel syndrome. Faecal samples for calprotectin have historically been collected at home by patients into screw-top pots and sent to laboratories where calprotectin is extracted and analysed. Faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) samples are collected at home into specific collection devices containing stabilising buffer. We evaluated the OC-FCa method for f-cal, developed by Eiken Chemical Co., Ltd. (Japan) that uses the same collection device and analyser as f-Hb. Methods OC-FCa was assessed for limit of blank (LOB), limit of detection (LOD), limit of quantification (LOQ), within and between-run imprecision, linearity, prozone, recovery and carryover. A method comparison against the BÜHLMANN fCAL® turbo (BÜHLMANN Laboratories AG, Switzerland) was performed using patient samples and EQA. Results The LOB was 3 µg calprotectin/g faeces (µg/g), LOD 8 μg/g and LOQ 20 μg/g. Within and between-run imprecision was <5%; linearity was good (R2 > 0.99); prozone was appropriately detected; recovery was 99.6%; no observed carryover. OC-FCa showed a strong positive bias compared with BÜHLMANN fCAL® turbo (Z=−5.3587, p < 0.001). When categorised using our local pathway, which interprets calprotectin concentrations and need for further investigation, Cohen’s Kappa demonstrates substantial agreement at <50 μg/g (κ=0.80) and >150 μg/g (κ=0.63) and fair agreement (κ=0.22) in the borderline category 50–150 μg/g. Conclusions The OC-FCa method performed well in the evaluation. With the lack of standardisation for f-cal a clinical study is required to evaluate the positive bias and establish suitable cut-off levels.