Multicenter comparison of imprecision at low concentrations of two regulatory approved high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assays

Using the clinical chemistry score in the emergency department to detect adverse cardiac events: a diagnostic accuracy study

BACKGROUND

The ability to rule out or in a major adverse cardiac event (MACE) in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome at emergency department (ED) presentation would be beneficial to patient care and the health care system. The clinical chemistry score (CCS) was evaluated in this context.

METHODS

This diagnostic accuracy study evaluated 2 different ED cohorts with suspected acute coronary syndrome. For patients in cohort 1, who presented to the ED of 3 hospitals in Hamilton, Ontario, between May and August 2013, retrospective measurements were taken using the Ortho Clinical Diagnostics high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) assay; for patients in cohort 2, who presented to the ED of the same 3 hospitals in Hamilton between November 2012 and February 2013, an ED cardiac presentation blood test panel was performed with the Abbott Diagnostics hs-cTnI assay. The sensitivity and specificity of the CCS (cut-offs of ≥ 1 and 5) and hs-cTnI alone (published cut-offs) were compared for MACE (composite of death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, revascularization) at 30 days for both cohorts and at 90 days for cohort 2.

RESULTS

The incidence of MACE at 30 days was higher in cohort 1 (n = 1058) (19.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 16.8%-22.2%) than in cohort 2 (n = 5974) (14.6%, 95% CI 13.6%-15.6%). In cohort 1, a CCS of 1 or above yielded a sensitivity of 99.5% (95% CI 97.3%-99.9%). The sensitivity with an Ortho hs-cTnI cut-off of 1 ng/L or above was 91.2% (95% CI 86.5%-95.7%). The specificity of a CCS of 5 (97.8%, 95% CI 96.5%-98.7%) was higher than when the overall 99th-percentile cut-off for the Ortho hs-cTnI assay (> 11 ng/L; 90.1%, 95% CI 87.9%-92.0%) was used. A similar pattern was observed in cohort 2 at 30 days and persisted at 90 days with the Abbott hs-cTnI assay.

INTERPRETATION

The CCS derived with 2 different hs-cTnI assays and ED populations yielded higher sensitivity and specificity estimates for MACE than hs-cTnI alone. An intervention study is needed to evaluate the impact of the CCS at both the patient and hospital levels.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01994577.

Clinical evaluation of Ortho Clinical Diagnostics high-sensitivity cardiac Troponin I assay in patients with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

As more companies obtain regulatory approval for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays there is an urgent need for independent analytical and clinical evaluations. To this end, we have evaluated Ortho Clinical Diagnostics' hs-cTnI assay and compared it to their contemporary cTnI-ES assay in emergency department (ED) patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

METHODS

The study cohort consisted of ED patients (n = 906) with symptoms suggestive of ACS who had Ortho hs-cTnI and cTnI-ES results at presentation and 3 h (with calculated delta (0-3 h) defined as the absolute concentration difference between paired results). The primary composite outcome was 7-day myocardial infarction (MI) or cardiovascular death, with secondary analyses performed for 7-day MI and index-MI. Analytical imprecision testing (i.e., coefficient of variation; CV), receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses with area under the curve (AUC), and diagnostic parameters (sensitivity/specificity/predictive values) were calculated.

RESULTS

The hs-cTnI assay had superior precision compared to the cTnI-ES assay below 5 ng/L in EDTA plasma (hs-cTnI CV ≤ 15% versus cTnI-ES CV ≥ 85%). The AUCs were higher for hs-cTnI as compared to cTnI-ES at 0 h (0.88 vs. 0.85), 3 h (0.94 vs. 0.92), and the delta (0-3 h) value (0.91 vs. 0.85) for the primary composite outcome (p < 0.05). At 3 h, the sensitivity/specificity for index-MI was ≥97%/≥82%, for 7-day MI was ≥89%/≥84%, and for the primary composite outcome was ≥90%/≥85% using the manufacturer's sex-specific 99th-percentile cutoffs.

CONCLUSION

The Ortho hs-cTnI assay has superior analytical and clinical performance over their contemporary cTnI-ES assay in evaluating ED patients with symptoms suggestive of ACS.

Clinical outcomes for chest pain patients discharged home from emergency departments using high-sensitivity versus conventional cardiac troponin assays

BACKGROUND

High-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays enhance detection of lower circulating troponin concentrations, but the impact on outcomes in clinical practice is unclear. Our objective was to compare outcomes of chest pain patients discharged from emergency departments (EDs) using hs-cTn and conventional troponin (cTn) assays.

METHODS

We conducted an observational study of chest pain patients aged 40-105 years who presented to an ED from April 1, 2013, to March 31, 2017, and were discharged home. We compared 30-day and 1-year outcomes of EDs that used hs-cTn versus cTn assays. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction or unstable angina. Comparisons were conducted with (1) no adjustment; (2) adjustment for demographic, socioeconomic, and hospital characteristics; and (3) full clinical adjustment.

RESULTS

Among the 394,910 patients, 62,138 (15.7%) were evaluated at hs-cTn EDs and 332,772 (84.3%) were evaluated at cTn EDs. Patients discharged from hs-cTn EDs were less likely to have diabetes, hypertension, or prior heart disease. At 30 days, the unadjusted primary outcome rate was lower in hs-cTn EDs (0.9% vs 1.0%, P < .001). The 30-day hazard ratios for the primary outcome were 0.84 (95% CI 0.77-0.92) for no adjustment and 0.98 (95% CI 0.88-1.08) for full adjustment. Over 1 year, patients discharged from hs-cTn EDs had significantly fewer primary outcomes (3.7% vs 4.1%, P < .001) and lower hazard ratio (0.93; 95% CI 0.89-0.98) even after full adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

Hs-cTn testing was associated with a significantly lower adjusted hazard of myocardial infarction, angina, and all-cause hospitalization at 1 year but not 30 days.

A Multicenter Assessment of the Sensitivity and Specificity for a Single High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin Test at Emergency Department Presentation for Hospital Admission

Background

Studies have illustrated how a low or undetectable high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) concentration at emergency department (ED) presentation can rule out myocardial infarction (MI). A problem with using an undetectable hs-cTn cutoff is that this value may be defined differently among hospitals and is also difficult to monitor. In the present study, we assess the diagnostic performance of a clinical chemistry score (CCS) vs hs-cTn alone in the presentation blood sample in the ED for patient hospital admission in a multicenter setting.

Methods

From January 1 to June 30, 2018, consecutive patients with random glucose, creatinine (for an estimated glomerular filtration rate calculation), and hs-cTnI (Abbott, 2 hospitals, Hamilton, Ontario, n = 10496) or hs-cTnT (Roche, 4 hospitals, Calgary, Alberta, n = 25177) were assessed for hospital admission with the CCS (range of scores, 0–5) or hs-cTn alone. Sensitivity, specificity, predicative values, and likelihood ratios were calculated for a CCS of 0 and 5 and for hs-cTn alone (hs-cTnI cutoffs, 5 and 26 ng/L; hs-cTnT cutoffs, 6 and 14 ng/L).

Results

The CCS of 0 (CCS &lt;1) identified approximately 10% of all patients as low risk and had a sensitivity for hospital admission of nearly 98% as compared to &lt;93% when hs-cTnT (&lt;6 ng/L) or hs-cTnI (&lt;5 ng/L) cutoffs alone were used. A CCS ≥5 had a specificity for hospital admission &gt;95%, with approximately 14% of patients at high risk.

Conclusions

An ED disposition (admit or send home) using the presentation blood sample could occur in nearly 25% of all patients by use of the CCS.

Sample matrix and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assays

Background

Manufacturers of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays have restricted use of what sample types or matrices are acceptable to use for measurement. Our goal was to evaluate the comparability of the Siemens ADVIA Centaur hs-cTnI assay across different matrices and under different storage conditions.

Methods

Three different QC-plasma matrices were evaluated for imprecision <10 ng/L. Passing-Bablok regression and difference plots were determined for cTnI concentrations spanning the reference interval (limit of quantification to male 99th-percentile: 2.5 ng/L to <60 ng/L) between serum and lithium heparin plasma, lithium heparin and EDTA plasma and between the Siemens and Abbott hs-cTnI assays. Stability at room temperature (RT) and 2–8 °C was also assessed across the three matrices.

Results

Over 16-weeks the SDs were ≤1.0 ng/L for QCs ranging from 5.0 to 8.3 ng/L. Across the reference interval there was excellent agreement between lithium heparin plasma and serum for the Siemens hs-cTnI assay (slope=0.98/intercept=–0.1), however, cTnI concentrations were proportionally lower in EDTA as compared to lithium heparin plasma (slope=0.90, 95% CI: 0.88–0.92). In lithium heparin plasma the Siemens hs-cTnI concentrations were higher than the Abbott hs-cTnI concentrations (slope=1.26/intercept=–0.2). Stability of cTnI in lithium heparin plasma as compared in serum and EDTA plasma appeared more labile, with decreases ≥20% in concentrations evident as early as 1-day in storage at RT.

Conclusions

There is excellent agreement in concentrations between lithium heparin plasma and serum with the Siemens ADVIA Centaur hs-cTnI assay; however, cTnI concentrations in EDTA plasma are lower. Reference intervals and clinical studies in EDTA plasma for the Centaur hs-cTnI assay are required before clinical use.

Evaluation of the Siemens ADVIA Centaur high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assay in serum

BACKGROUND

International recommendations on high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) testing recommend that laboratories select only one sample type for testing. We evaluated the Siemens ADVIA Centaur hs-cTnI assay in serum and thereby provide information on imprecision, long-term storage stability, freeze-thaw stability, method comparison to other hs-cTnI assays, and clinical performance.

METHODS

Patients with chest pain onset <6 h who already had Roche hs-cTnT, Beckman hs-cTnI and Abbott hs-cTnI results recorded and had non-thawed and frozen serum aliquots formed the study population (n = 134 patients with 305 serum aliquots obtained at either 0, 3 or 6 h stored below -70 °C since 2003) for measurement with the Siemens hs-cTnI assay in 2018. Receiver-operating characteristic curve analyses for myocardial infarction (MI) using the highest obtained hs-cTn concentration was performed. Additional comparison testing on serum samples stored frozen (at -70 °C for <1 month in 2018) for the Siemens and Abbott hs-cTnI assays were performed, as well as precision testing in serum pools and freeze-thaw stability testing.

RESULTS

The Siemens hs-cTnI assay had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.978 (95%CI: 0.937-0.996) for MI in the study cohort (Roche hs-cTnT AUC = 0.965 and Abbott AUC = 0.973). The Siemens hs-cTnI assay yielded higher cTnI concentrations than the other hs-cTn assays, with the same proportional bias (slope = 1.4) between the Siemens and Abbott hs-cTnI assays obtained from serum samples collected in 2003 and 2018. Over 3 months, a low serum pool of 3.5 ng/l achieved a CV of 20% (SD = 0.7, n = 42) and a high serum pool of 820 ng/l achieved a CV of 2.3% (SD = 20, n = 42). Three different serum pools recovered within 10% from baseline concentration after 5 freeze-thaw cycles for the Siemens hs-cTnI assay.

CONCLUSIONS

In serum, the Siemens ADVIA Centaur hs-cTnI assay had excellent clinical performance for MI in an early chest pain onset population, acceptable precision at normal and highly elevated cTnI concentrations, long-term storage stability (15 y storage below -70 °C) and acceptable freeze-thaw stability, all of which supports serum as an acceptable sample type to use in clinical studies and in clinical practice.