基于外部质量评估的肿瘤标志物协调模拟;CA 15-3 和 CEA 可实现协调的启示。

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Huub H Van Rossum, Stefan Holdenrieder, Yeo-Min Yun, Dina Patel, Marc Thelen, Junghan Song, Nick Unsworth, Katherine Partridge, Melanie Moore, Wei Cui, Lakshmi Ramanathan, Qing H Meng, Bart E P B Ballieux, Catharine Sturgeon, Hubert Vesper
{"title":"基于外部质量评估的肿瘤标志物协调模拟;CA 15-3 和 CEA 可实现协调的启示。","authors":"Huub H Van Rossum, Stefan Holdenrieder, Yeo-Min Yun, Dina Patel, Marc Thelen, Junghan Song, Nick Unsworth, Katherine Partridge, Melanie Moore, Wei Cui, Lakshmi Ramanathan, Qing H Meng, Bart E P B Ballieux, Catharine Sturgeon, Hubert Vesper","doi":"10.1515/cclm-2024-0696","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>CA 15-3 and CEA are tumor markers used in routine clinical care for breast cancer and colorectal cancer, among others. Current measurement procedures (MP) for these tumor markers are considered to be insufficiently harmonized. This study investigated the achievable harmonization for CA 15-3 and CEA by using an <i>in silico</i> simulation of external quality assessment (EQA) data from multiple EQA programs using patient-pool based samples.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>CA 15-3 and CEA data from SKML (2021), UK NEQAS (2020-2021) and KEQAS (2020-2021) were used. A harmonization protocol was defined in which MPs that were considered equivalent were used to value assign EQA samples, and recalibration was only required if the MP had a bias of >5 % with value assigned EQA. Harmonization status was assessed by determining the mean level of agreement and residual variation by CV (%).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Only MPs from Abbott, Beckman, Roche and Siemens were available in all EQA programs. For CA 15-3, recalibration was proposed for Beckman MP only and for CEA, recalibration was proposed for Siemens MP only. When the harmonization procedures were applied, for CA 15-3 the pre-harmonization mean bias range per MP was reduced from -29.28 to 9.86 %, into -0.09-0.12 % after harmonization. For CEA, the mean bias range per MP was reduced from -23.78 to 2.00 % pre-harmonization to -3.13-1.42 % post-harmonization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The present study suggests that a significant improvement in the harmonization status of CA 15-3 and CEA may be achieved by recalibration of a limited number of MPs.</p>","PeriodicalId":10390,"journal":{"name":"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"External quality assessment-based tumor marker harmonization simulation; insights in achievable harmonization for CA 15-3 and CEA.\",\"authors\":\"Huub H Van Rossum, Stefan Holdenrieder, Yeo-Min Yun, Dina Patel, Marc Thelen, Junghan Song, Nick Unsworth, Katherine Partridge, Melanie Moore, Wei Cui, Lakshmi Ramanathan, Qing H Meng, Bart E P B Ballieux, Catharine Sturgeon, Hubert Vesper\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/cclm-2024-0696\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>CA 15-3 and CEA are tumor markers used in routine clinical care for breast cancer and colorectal cancer, among others. Current measurement procedures (MP) for these tumor markers are considered to be insufficiently harmonized. This study investigated the achievable harmonization for CA 15-3 and CEA by using an <i>in silico</i> simulation of external quality assessment (EQA) data from multiple EQA programs using patient-pool based samples.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>CA 15-3 and CEA data from SKML (2021), UK NEQAS (2020-2021) and KEQAS (2020-2021) were used. A harmonization protocol was defined in which MPs that were considered equivalent were used to value assign EQA samples, and recalibration was only required if the MP had a bias of >5 % with value assigned EQA. Harmonization status was assessed by determining the mean level of agreement and residual variation by CV (%).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Only MPs from Abbott, Beckman, Roche and Siemens were available in all EQA programs. For CA 15-3, recalibration was proposed for Beckman MP only and for CEA, recalibration was proposed for Siemens MP only. When the harmonization procedures were applied, for CA 15-3 the pre-harmonization mean bias range per MP was reduced from -29.28 to 9.86 %, into -0.09-0.12 % after harmonization. For CEA, the mean bias range per MP was reduced from -23.78 to 2.00 % pre-harmonization to -3.13-1.42 % post-harmonization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The present study suggests that a significant improvement in the harmonization status of CA 15-3 and CEA may be achieved by recalibration of a limited number of MPs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2024-0696\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2024-0696","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

摘要

目的:CA 15-3 和 CEA 是用于乳腺癌和结直肠癌等常规临床治疗的肿瘤标志物。目前这些肿瘤标志物的测量程序(MP)被认为不够统一。本研究通过对多个 EQA 项目的外部质量评估 (EQA) 数据进行硅模拟,使用基于患者库的样本,研究了 CA 15-3 和 CEA 可实现的协调性:方法:使用来自 SKML(2021 年)、UK NEQAS(2020-2021 年)和 KEQAS(2020-2021 年)的 CA 15-3 和 CEA 数据。定义了一个协调协议,其中被认为等效的 MP 用于对 EQA 样品进行赋值,只有当 MP 与赋值 EQA 的偏差大于 5 % 时才需要重新校准。通过确定平均一致水平和以 CV (%) 表示的残差来评估协调状态:所有 EQA 程序中只有雅培、贝克曼、罗氏和西门子的 MP 可用。对于 CA 15-3,仅建议对贝克曼 MP 进行重新校准;对于 CEA,仅建议对西门子 MP 进行重新校准。应用协调程序后,对于 CA 15-3,协调前每个 MP 的平均偏差范围从 -29.28% 降至 9.86%,协调后降至 -0.09-0.12%。对于 CEA,每个 MP 的平均偏差范围从协调前的 -23.78% 到 2.00%,减少到协调后的 -3.13% 到 1.42%:本研究表明,通过对有限数量的 MP 进行重新校准,可显著改善 CA 15-3 和 CEA 的协调状态。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
External quality assessment-based tumor marker harmonization simulation; insights in achievable harmonization for CA 15-3 and CEA.

Objectives: CA 15-3 and CEA are tumor markers used in routine clinical care for breast cancer and colorectal cancer, among others. Current measurement procedures (MP) for these tumor markers are considered to be insufficiently harmonized. This study investigated the achievable harmonization for CA 15-3 and CEA by using an in silico simulation of external quality assessment (EQA) data from multiple EQA programs using patient-pool based samples.

Methods: CA 15-3 and CEA data from SKML (2021), UK NEQAS (2020-2021) and KEQAS (2020-2021) were used. A harmonization protocol was defined in which MPs that were considered equivalent were used to value assign EQA samples, and recalibration was only required if the MP had a bias of >5 % with value assigned EQA. Harmonization status was assessed by determining the mean level of agreement and residual variation by CV (%).

Results: Only MPs from Abbott, Beckman, Roche and Siemens were available in all EQA programs. For CA 15-3, recalibration was proposed for Beckman MP only and for CEA, recalibration was proposed for Siemens MP only. When the harmonization procedures were applied, for CA 15-3 the pre-harmonization mean bias range per MP was reduced from -29.28 to 9.86 %, into -0.09-0.12 % after harmonization. For CEA, the mean bias range per MP was reduced from -23.78 to 2.00 % pre-harmonization to -3.13-1.42 % post-harmonization.

Conclusions: The present study suggests that a significant improvement in the harmonization status of CA 15-3 and CEA may be achieved by recalibration of a limited number of MPs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine
Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
16.20%
发文量
306
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) publishes articles on novel teaching and training methods applicable to laboratory medicine. CCLM welcomes contributions on the progress in fundamental and applied research and cutting-edge clinical laboratory medicine. It is one of the leading journals in the field, with an impact factor over 3. CCLM is issued monthly, and it is published in print and electronically. CCLM is the official journal of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) and publishes regularly EFLM recommendations and news. CCLM is the official journal of the National Societies from Austria (ÖGLMKC); Belgium (RBSLM); Germany (DGKL); Hungary (MLDT); Ireland (ACBI); Italy (SIBioC); Portugal (SPML); and Slovenia (SZKK); and it is affiliated to AACB (Australia) and SFBC (France). Topics: - clinical biochemistry - clinical genomics and molecular biology - clinical haematology and coagulation - clinical immunology and autoimmunity - clinical microbiology - drug monitoring and analysis - evaluation of diagnostic biomarkers - disease-oriented topics (cardiovascular disease, cancer diagnostics, diabetes) - new reagents, instrumentation and technologies - new methodologies - reference materials and methods - reference values and decision limits - quality and safety in laboratory medicine - translational laboratory medicine - clinical metrology Follow @cclm_degruyter on Twitter!
×
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