Investigation of 2 models to set and evaluate quality targets for hb a1c: biological variation and sigma-metrics

BACKGROUND

A major objective of the IFCC Task Force on Implementation of HbA1c Standardization is to develop a model to define quality targets for glycated hemoglobin (Hb A1c).

METHODS

Two generic models, biological variation and sigma-metrics, are investigated. We selected variables in the models for Hb A1c and used data of external quality assurance/proficiency testing programs to evaluate the suitability of the models to set and evaluate quality targets within and between laboratories.

RESULTS

In the biological variation model, 48% of individual laboratories and none of the 26 instrument groups met the minimum performance criterion. In the sigma-metrics model, with a total allowable error (TAE) set at 5 mmol/mol (0.46% NGSP), 77% of the individual laboratories and 12 of 26 instrument groups met the 2σ criterion.

CONCLUSIONS

The biological variation and sigma-metrics models were demonstrated to be suitable for setting and evaluating quality targets within and between laboratories. The sigma-metrics model is more flexible, as both the TAE and the risk of failure can be adjusted to the situation-for example, requirements related to diagnosis/monitoring or international authorities. With the aim of reaching (inter)national consensus on advice regarding quality targets for Hb A1c, the Task Force suggests the sigma-metrics model as the model of choice, with default values of 5 mmol/mol (0.46%) for TAE and risk levels of 2σ and 4σ for routine laboratories and laboratories performing clinical trials, respectively. These goals should serve as a starting point for discussion with international stakeholders in the field of diabetes.

Harmonization of Measurement Results of the Alcohol Biomarker Carbohydrate-Deficient Transferrin by Use of the Toolbox of Technical Procedures of the International Consortium for Harmonization of Clinical Laboratory Results

BACKGROUND

The need for equivalent results of routine measurement procedures for the alcohol biomarker carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (CDT) has been recognized by the IFCC. This article describes a project to harmonize CDT as conducted by an IFCC working group initiated for this purpose.

METHODS

We used procedures for achieving harmonization as developed by the Consortium for Harmonization of Clinical Laboratory Results to assess the suitability of a candidate reference measurement procedure (cRMP), candidate reference materials (cRMs), and the success of efforts to achieve harmonization.

RESULTS

CDT measurement procedures in routine use showed good reproducibility (CV 1.1%–2.8%) and linearity (r > 0.990) with variable slopes (0.766–1.065) and intercepts (−0.34 to 0.92) compared to the cRMP. Heterogeneity after simulated harmonization was 4.7%. cRMs of frozen human native sera demonstrated commutability and 3-year stability for routine measurement procedures. The cRMP provided reproducible value assignment to cRMs with an expanded uncertainty (k = 2) of 0.03% at the 1.2% CDT level and 0.06% at the 4.4% CDT level. Harmonization efforts reduced the intermeasurement CV from 8.8% to 3.4%, allowed 99% recovery of the values assigned with the cRMP, and demonstrated 99% of results within the desirable allowable total error. Harmonization was less successful in samples with low CDT and high trisialotransferrin concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

Harmonization of CDT is possible with frozen human native sera as cRMs with values assigned by use of the cRMP. We propose the cRMP as a candidate international conventional reference measurement procedure and cRMs as candidate international calibrators.

Harmonisation of seven common enzyme results through EQA

Equivalent results between different laboratories enable optimal patient care and can be achieved with harmonisation. We report on EQA-initiated national harmonisation of seven enzymes using commutable samples.

EQA samples were prepared from human serum spiked with human recombinant enzymes. Target values were assigned with the IFCC Reference Measurement Procedures. The same samples were included at four occasions in the EQA programmes of 2012 and 2013. Laboratories were encouraged to report IFCC traceable results. A parallel study was done to confirm commutability of the samples.

Of the 223 participating laboratories, 95% reported IFCC traceable results, ranging from 98% (ASAT) to 87% (amylase). Users of Roche and Siemens (97%) more frequently reported in IFCC traceable results than users of Abbott (91%), Beckman (90%), and Olympus (87%). The success of harmonisation, expressed as the recovery of assigned values and the inter-laboratory CV was: ALAT (recovery 100%; inter-lab CV 4%), ASAT (102%; 4%), LD (98%; 3%), CK (101%; 5%), GGT (98%; 4%), AP (96%; 6%), amylase (99%; 4%). There were no significant differences between the manufacturers. Commutability was demonstrated in the parallel study. Equal results in the same sample in the 2012 and 2013 EQA programmes demonstrated stability of the samples.

The EQA-initiated national harmonisation of seven enzymes, using stable, commutable human serum samples, spiked with human recombinant enzymes, and targeted with the IFCC Reference Measurement Procedures, was successful in terms of implementation of IFCC traceable results (95%), recovery of the target (99%), and inter-laboratory CV (4%).

HbA1c: a review of analytical and clinical aspects

After the relationship between glycemic control and the HbA1c concentration was demonstrated, many tests have been developed to determine the HbA1c concentration. The test results are standardized to the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) Reference Measurement Procedure (RMP) in harmony with the efforts of the National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP). The longitudinal use of the test requires strict quality management including accreditation of the laboratory, a dedicated internal control design, participation in an external quality assessment (EQA) program (proficiency test), and careful consideration of pre- and post-analytical aspects of the test. Performance goals for optimizing determination of the HbA1c concentration have been described. As an index of long-term glycemic control and a risk predictor, the HbA1c concentration is an indispensable part of routine management of diabetes. Because of the improving quality of the test, the HbA1c concentration is being increasingly applied in the diagnosis of diabetes. There are, however, concerns of this application in point-of-care settings. The HbA1c concentration is also used to achieve stringent control in pregnant diabetic patients. Strict standardization enables the definition of universal reference values and clinical decision limits. This review describes the present status of analytical and clinical aspects of determining the HbA1c concentration and highlights the challenges involved.

Systematic monitoring of standardization and harmonization status with commutable EQA-samples--five year experience from the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Equivalence of results among laboratories is a major mission for medical laboratories. Monitoring of test equivalence is structurally integrated in the Dutch External Quality Assessment (EQA) scheme since 2005. Commutable poolsera, single donation "spy" sera and biological variance tolerance limits have been introduced in the EQA scheme for evaluation of the degree of test equivalence and its determinants.

METHODS

In the annual cycle scheme 24 samples, covering the (patho)physiological measuring range for 17 analytes, are assayed by 220 participating laboratories at biweekly intervals. Test equivalence was evaluated by calculating overall median interlaboratory coefficients of variation (CVs) and its bias and imprecision components. Data from 2005 and 2010 schemes are evaluated to investigate trends in performance and success of standardization efforts.

RESULTS

Overall median interlaboratory CVs in 2010 were mostly better than in 2005. Median interlaboratory CVs became <5% for electrolytes and substrates, and <10% for enzymes. Improvement in median interlaboratory CVs over these five years is mainly explained by improved method standardization, especially for enzymes and creatinine.

CONCLUSION

The Dutch EQA-program proves to be a powerful instrument to evaluate test equivalence. It allows monitoring standardization efforts in a highly effective way and gives insight into remaining standardization potential.

Proficiency testing/external quality assessment: current challenges and future directions

BACKGROUND

Proficiency testing (PT), or external quality assessment (EQA), is intended to verify on a recurring basis that laboratory results conform to expectations for the quality required for patient care.

CONTENT

Key factors for interpreting PT/EQA results are knowledge of the commutability of the samples used and the process used for target value assignment. A commutable PT/EQA sample demonstrates the same numeric relationship between different measurement procedures as that expected for patients' samples. Noncommutable PT/EQA samples frequently have a matrix-related bias of unknown magnitude that limits interpretation of results. PT/EQA results for commutable samples can be used to assess accuracy against a reference measurement procedure or a designated comparison method. In addition, the agreement of the results between different measurement procedures for commutable samples reflects that which would be seen for patients' samples. PT/EQA results for noncommutable samples must be compared to a peer group mean/median of results from participants who use measurement procedures that are expected to have the same or very similar matrix-related bias. Peer group evaluation is used to asses whether a laboratory is using a measurement procedure in conformance to the manufacturer's specifications and/or in conformance to other laboratories using the same technology. A noncommutable PT/EQA sample does not give meaningful information about the relationship of results for patients' samples between different measurement procedures.

SUMMARY

PT/EQA provides substantial value to the practice of laboratory medicine by assessing the performance of individual laboratories and, when commutable samples are used, the status of standardization or harmonization among different measurement procedures.

One in five laboratories using various hemoglobin A1c methods do not meet the criteria for optimal diabetes care management

BACKGROUND

We assessed the reference change value (RCV) of currently available hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) laboratory assays, which is defined as the critical difference between two consecutive HbA(1c) measurements representing a significant change in health status.

METHODS

We examined the individual laboratory coefficients of variation (CVs) in the Dutch/Belgian quality scheme based on 24 lyophilized samples and calculated the RCV per laboratory (n = 220) and per assay method. In addition, two pooled whole blood samples were sent to the participating laboratories. The individual laboratory results were compared to the assigned value ± an allowable total error (TE(a)) of 6%.

RESULTS

At HbA(1c) values of 41.0 mmol/mol (5.9%-Diabetes Control and Complications Trial [DCCT]) and 61.8 mmol/mol (7.8%-DCCT), 99% and 98%, respectively, of the laboratories reported a value within a TE(a) limit of 6%. The analytical CV of the HbA(1c) method used in 78% of the laboratories is <2.4%. The mean RCV at an HbA(1c) value of 53 mmol/mol (7.0%-DCCT) for methods of Bio-Rad is 5.9 mmol/mol (0.59%-DCCT); for Arkray/Menarini, 4.3 mmol/mol (0.43%-DCCT); for Roche, 6.5 mmol/mol (0.65%-DCCT); for Tosoh, 3.3 mmol/mol (0.33%-DCCT); and for other methods, 6.3 mmol/mol (0.63%-DCCT).

CONCLUSIONS

The analytical performance of the majority of laboratory HbA(1c) methods is within the clinical requirements. However, based on the calculated RCV, 21.8% of the laboratories using different HbA(1c) methods are not able to distinguish an HbA(1c) result of 59 mmol/mol (7.5%-DCCT) from a previous HbA(1c) result of 53 mmol/mol (7.0%-DCCT). It can be presumed that differences in HbA(1c) results of 5 mmol/mol (0.5%-DCCT) do influence treatment decisions.

Evaluation of the Menarini/ARKRAY ADAMS A1c HA-8180V analyser for HbA1c

BACKGROUND

We report an evaluation of the Menarini/ARKRAY ADAMS A1c HA-8180V analyser (HA-8180V), the fifth generation Menarini/ARKRAY ion-exchange HPLC for the measurement of HbA(1c).

METHODS

We evaluated the analytical performance, the measurement of haemoglobin variants and the performance in comparison to major analytical methods.

RESULTS

Within-run, between-run and total CV were 0.2%, 0.4% and 0.7% at low HbA(1c) concentrations and 0.2%, 0.2% and 0.4% at high HbA(1c) concentrations, respectively. Trueness revealed a maximum deviation of 0.8 mmol/mol (IFCC units) or 0.1% (NGSP units) over the relevant analytical range. Linearity, carry-over and linear drift were excellent. Labile-HbA(1c), carbamylated haemoglobin, icteric samples and variation in hematocrit did not affect HbA(1c) outcome. Haemoglobin variants AS, AC and F do not affect HbA(1c) outcome and are explicitly identified and correctly quantified. HbA(1c) can not be measured in samples with AE and AD, but these variants are identified correctly. In comparison to other methods used at present, the HA-8180V shows excellent performance.

CONCLUSIONS

The HA-8180V performs at a high level and is fit for any clinical application.

Toward standardization of carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (CDT) measurements: II. Performance of a laboratory network running the HPLC candidate reference measurement procedure and evaluation of a candidate reference material

Carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (CDT) is a descriptive term used for a temporary change in the transferrin glycosylation profile caused by alcohol, and used as a biomarker of chronic high alcohol consumption. The use of an array of methods for measurement of CDT in various absolute or relative amounts, and sometimes covering different transferrin glycoforms, has complicated the comparability of results and caused confusion among medical staff. This situation prompted initiation of an IFCC Working Group on CDT standardization. This second publication of the WG-CDT covers the establishment of a network of reference laboratories running a high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) candidate reference measurement procedure, and evaluation of candidate secondary reference materials. The network laboratories demonstrated good and reproducible performance and thus can be used to assign target values for calibrators and controls. A candidate secondary reference material based on native human serum lyophilized with a cryo-/lyoprotectant to prevent protein denaturation was found to be commutable and stable during storage. A proposed strategy for calibration of different CDT methods is also presented. In an external quality assurance study involving 66 laboratories and covering the current routine CDT assays (HPLC, capillary electrophoresis and immunoassay), recalculation of observed results based on the nominal values for the candidate calibrator reduced the overall coefficient of variation from 18.9% to 5.5%. The logistics for distribution of reference materials and review of results were found to be functional, indicating that a full reference system for CDT may soon be available.

A review of the challenge in measuring hemoglobin A1c

The attraction of the simple biochemical concept combined with a clinical requirement for a long-term marker of glycolic control in diabetes has made hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) one of the most important assays undertaken in the medical laboratory. The diversity in the biochemistry of glycation, clinical requirements, and management demands has resulted in a broad range of methods being developed since HbA1c was described in the late 1960s. A range of analytic principles are used for the measurement of HbA1c. The charge difference between hemoglobin A0 and HbA1c has been widely utilized to separate these two fractions, most notably found these days in ion-exchange high-performance liquid chromatography systems; the difference in molecular structure (affinity chromatography and immunochemical methods) are becoming widely available. Different results found in different laboratories using a variety of HbA1c analyses resulted in the need for standardization, most notably in the United States, Japan, and Sweden. Designated comparison methods are now located in these three countries, but as they are arbitrarily chosen and have differences in specificity, results of these methods and the reference values and action limits of the methods differ and only harmonized HbA1c in specific geographic areas. A reference measurement system within the concept of metrological traceability is now globally accepted as the only valid analytic anchor. However, there is still discussion over the units to be reported. The consensus statement of the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC), the American Diabetes Association, the International Diabetes Federation, and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes suggests reporting HbA1c in IFCC units (mmol/mol), National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program units (%), and estimated average glucose (either in mg/dl or mmol/liter). The implementation of this consensus statement raised new questions, to be answered in a concerted action of clinicians, biochemists, external quality assessment organizers, patient groups, and manufacturers.

Statistical Methods for Monitoring the Relationship between the IFCC Reference Measurement Procedure for Hemoglobin A1c and the Designated Comparison Methods in the United States, Japan, and Sweden

Background: The American Diabetes Association (ADA)/European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)/International Diabetes Federation (IDF)/IFCC Consensus Statement on the worldwide standardization of HbA1c states that “… [HbA1c] results are to be reported world-wide in IFCC units … and derived NGSP units … , using the IFCC-NGSP master equation.”

Methods: We describe statistical methods to evaluate and monitor the relationships as expressed in master equations (MEs) between the IFCC Reference Measurement procedure (IFCC-RM) and designated comparison methods (DCMs) [US National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP), Japanese Diabetes Society/Japanese Society for Clinical Chemistry (JDS/JSCC), and Mono-S in Sweden]. We applied these statistics, including uncertainty calculations, to 12 studies in which networks of reference laboratories participated, operating the IFCC-RM and DCMs.

Results: For NGSP and Mono-S, slope, intercept, and derived percentage HbA1c at the therapeutic target show compliance with the respective MEs in all 12 studies. For JDS/JSCC, a slight deviation is seen in slope and derived percentage HbA1c in 2 of the 12 studies. Using the MEs, the uncertainty in an assigned value increases from 0.42 mmol/mol HbA1c (IFCC-RM) to 0.47 (NGSP), 0.49 (JDS/JSCC), and 0.51 (Mono-S).

Conclusions: We describe sound statistical methods for the investigation of relations between networks of reference laboratories. Application of these statistical methods to the relationship between the IFCC-RM and DCMs in the US, Japan, and Sweden shows that they are suitable for the purpose, and the results support the applicability of the ADA/EASD/IDF/IFCC Consensus Statement on HbA1c measurement.

The IFCC Reference Measurement System for HbA1c: A 6-Year Progress Report

Background: The IFCC Reference Measurement System for hemoglobin (Hb)A1c (IFCC-RM) has been developed within the framework of metrologic traceability and is embedded in a network of 14 reference laboratories. This paper describes the outcome of 12 intercomparison studies (periodic evaluations to control essential elements of the IFCC-RM).

Methods: Each study included: unknown samples (to test individual network laboratories); known samples (controls); recently manufactured calibrators (to check calculated assigned value); stored calibrators (to test stability) and a calibration-set (to calibrate the IFCC-RM). The unknown samples are measured by use of the IFCC-RM and the designated comparison methods [DCMs; the National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP) in the US, Japanese Diabetes Society/Japanese Society for Clinical Chemistry (JDS/JSCC) in Japan, and Mono-S in Sweden] are used to investigate the stability of the Master Equation (ME), the relationship between IFCC-RM and DCMs.

Results: A total of 105 IFCC-RM data sets were evaluated: 95 were approved, 5 were not, and for 5 no data were submitted. Trend analysis of the MEs, expressed as change in percentage HbA1c per year, revealed 0.000% (NGSP, not significant), −0.030%, (JDS/JSCC; significant) and −0.016% (Mono-S; not significant). Evaluation of long-term performance revealed no systematic change over time; 2 laboratories showed significant bias, 1 poor reproducibility. The mean HbA1c determined by laboratories performing mass spectrometry (MS) was the same as the mean determined by laboratories using capillary electrophoresis (CE), but the reproducibility at laboratories using CE was better. One batch of new calibrators was not approved. All stored calibrators were stable.

Conclusion: A sound reference system is in place to ensure continuity and stability of the analytical anchor for HbA1c.

Trueness verification of actual creatinine assays in the European market demonstrates a disappointing variability that needs substantial improvement. An international study in the framework of the EC4 creatinine standardization working group

: The European In Vitro Diagnostics (IVD) directive requires traceability to reference methods and materials of analytes. It is a task of the profession to verify the trueness of results and IVD compatibility.

: The results of a trueness verification study by the European Communities Confederation of Clinical Chemistry (EC4) working group on creatinine standardization are described, in which 189 European laboratories analyzed serum creatinine in a commutable serum-based material, using analytical systems from seven companies. Values were targeted using isotope dilution gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. Results were tested on their compliance to a set of three criteria: trueness, i.e., no significant bias relative to the target value, between-laboratory variation and within-laboratory variation relative to the maximum allowable error.

: For the lower and intermediate level, values differed significantly from the target value in the Jaffe and the dry chemistry methods. At the high level, dry chemistry yielded higher results. Between-laboratory coefficients of variation ranged from 4.37% to 8.74%. Total error budget was mainly consumed by the bias. Non-compensated Jaffe methods largely exceeded the total error budget. Best results were obtained for the enzymatic method. The dry chemistry method consumed a large part of its error budget due to calibration bias.

: Despite the European IVD directive and the growing needs for creatinine standardization, an unacceptable inter-laboratory variation was observed, which was mainly due to calibration differences. The calibration variation has major clinical consequences, in particular in pediatrics, where reference ranges for serum and plasma creatinine are low, and in the estimation of glomerular filtration rate.

Clin Chem Lab Med 2008;46:1319–25.

HbA1c standardisation: history, science and politics

Significant analytical improvements have occurred since glycated haemoglobin (GHb), measured as total HbA(1), was first used in routine clinical laboratories around 1977. Following the publication of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) study in 1993 the issue of international standardisation became an important objective for scientists and clinicians. The lack of international standardisation led several countries to develop national standardisation programs. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) Working Group on Standardisation of HbA(1c) established a true international reference measurement system for HbA(1c) and the successful preparation of pure HbA(1c) calibration material that should lead to further improvements in inter-method and inter-laboratory variability. Reporting of HbA(1c) has been agreed using the units of mmol/mol (IFCC) and percent (National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program, NGSP).

Differences in national legislation for the implementation of lead regulations included in the European directive for the protection of the health and safety of workers with occupational exposure to chemical agents (98/24/EC)

BACKGROUND

The European Council Directive 98/24 on the protection of the health and safety of workers exposed to chemical agents sets out provisions for environmental and biological monitoring, making specific reference to binding limit values and health surveillance measures for those with exposure to lead

OBJECTIVES

To compare how the Directive has been implemented at a national level in EU countries and to determine whether workers receive equivalent protection.

METHODS

Information on selected key issues was collected from 14 EU countries by means of a structured questionnaire.

RESULTS

National occupational exposure limit values generally reflect that set by the Directive (0.15 mg/m(3)), but in five cases lower limits are set. National binding biological limit values range from 20 microg/100 ml blood in one country up to 80 microg/100 ml blood in others. The risk to the unborn child is generally recognised with specific measures for women of child-bearing potential or those that are pregnant or breast feeding. In only three countries are special arrangements included for young workers. Limits at which medical surveillance is put into effect are more consistent at 40 microg/100 ml in most countries. The Directive also refers to guidelines for health surveillance but none have been issued with respect to lead. Thus monitoring strategies and requirements for analytical performance vary considerably.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this survey suggest that protection of workers against the risk of exposure to lead at work is far from uniform across the European Union. Such disparity may also have implications on the requirements set at national level for laboratories measuring lead in blood and/or air. In the interest of harmonisation within the EU, further consideration should be given to the Annex II of the EC Directive 98/24, taking into account the suggestions for lower binding limit values for lead; this should include full guidelines for medical surveillance and requirements for laboratories should be issued.

Trueness verification and traceability assessment of results from commercial systems for measurement of six enzyme activities in serum

BACKGROUND

The in vitro diagnostics directive of the European Union requires traceability to higher order reference measurement procedures and materials for analytes in assuring the result trueness and comparability of laboratory measurements. Manufacturers must ensure that the systems they market are calibrated against available reference systems. Validation of metrologically traceable calibrations is, however, required.

METHODS

A commutable serum-based material was analyzed in three reference laboratories and target values for six enzymes (ALT, AST, CK, GGT, LD, amylase) were assigned using IFCC reference measurement procedures. 70 laboratories in Germany, Italy, and The Netherlands measured the same enzymes in the material using procedures from six commercial companies. A system for maximum allowable error was developed from the biological variation model and the results of the various procedures were tested on their compliance to trueness and between-laboratory and within-laboratory variations relative to the maximum allowable.

RESULTS

For ALT results were relatively good. >95% of laboratories using systems from Dade, Olympus, Ortho and Roche are expected to comply traceability within the biologically derived limits, and 94% respectively 89% from Abbott and Beckman. For AST and GGT only Dade respectively Olympus fully complied. For CK all companies showed significant bias. Nevertheless >95% of laboratories applying Abbott, Beckman and Roche systems will comply. Finally, LD and amylase measurements require significant improvement. Some manufacturers continue to sell on the European market assays giving results which are not traceable to the internationally accepted reference systems.

CONCLUSIONS

The traceability of enzyme measurements obtained with routine procedures to internationally accepted IFCC reference systems is not yet satisfactorily accomplished in clinical practice.