International Normalized Ratio (INR) – Proficiency Tests by ÖQUASTA for the Prothrombin Time

Use of INR calibrator plasmas in the routine coagulation laboratory: a study of two thrombolastin reagents

INR values may be either calculated with the ISI values supplied by thromboplastin manufacturers or are directly extrapolated from certified INR calibrator plasmas. We tested the principle of local INR calibration using INR calibrator plasmas (PT-Multi Calibrator, Siemens), two thromboplastin reagents (Neoplastin Plus, rabbit brain, Stago, coagulometer-specific ISI 1.31, and Innovin, recombinant human tissue factor, Siemens) and the same coagulometer (STA-R, Stago) in 100 patients on warfarin. Using a ISI value of 0.77 with Tomenson correction for Innovin (correction factor=1.09), INR values of patients were similar with the two reagents, with a bias of 0.03 INR units and no significant regression of the difference over the average INR by method comparison analysis. With the INR calibrator plasmas, INR values with Neoplastin Plus were lower than Innovin values with an average bias of 0.39 INR units and a significant regression of the difference over the average INR (r=-0.91). Significant bias (0.16 INR units, p<0.00001) and regression (r=-0.77) was also observed by comparison of Neoplastin Plus INRs with Innovin calibrated INRs. Based on a therapeutic INR interval of 2.0 to 3.5, discordance in warfarin dosing was approximately 3 times higher with INR calibration (27% vs 11%). Because of non commutability with fresh plasma samples, local INR calibration with lyophilized calibrator plasmas may not be valid for some reagent-instrument combinations.

Use of Lyophilized Calibrant Plasmas for Simplified International Normalized Ratio Determination with a Human Tissue Factor Thromboplastin Reagent Derived from Cultured Human Cells

Background: For monitoring of treatment with oral anticoagulants, the clotting time obtained in the prothrombin time (PT) test is transformed to the International Normalized Ratio (INR) with use of a system-specific International Sensitivity Index (ISI). The calibrant plasma procedure (CPP) is an alternative approach to INR calculation based on the use of a set of lyophilized plasmas with assigned INRs.

Methods: With the CPP, a linear relationship is established between log(PT) and log(INR), using orthogonal regression. CPP was validated for Simplastin HTF, a new human tissue factor reagent derived from cultured human cells. CPP precision was assessed as the CV of the slope of the regression line. The accuracy of the CPP was determined by comparing the INR obtained with the CPP with that obtained with the established ISI-based reference method. INRs of the calibrants were assigned by different routes: by manufacturer (consensus labeling) or by use of Simplastin HTF or International Reference Preparations (IRPs; rTF/95 or RBT/90).

Results: The mean CV of the CPP regression slope ranged from 1.0% (Simplastin HTF reagent-specific INR) to 2.4% (INR assigned with rTF/95). INRs calculated with the CPP were similar to those obtained with the reference method, but when the routes for assigning INRs to the calibrant plasmas were compared, the mean difference in INR between CPP and the reference method was smaller with Simplastin HTF reagent-specific values. In several (but not all) cases, this difference was significant (P &lt;0.05, t-test).

Conclusion: CPP can be used for local INR determination, but better precision and accuracy are obtained with reagent-specific INRs compared with INR assignment by consensus labeling or IRP.