Assay Imprecision and 99th-Percentile Reference Value of a High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin I Assay

Performance of a prehospital HEART score in patients with possible myocardial infarction: a prospective evaluation

INTRODUCTION

The History, Electrocardiogram (ECG), Age, Risk Factors and Troponin (HEART) score is commonly used to risk stratify patients with possible myocardial infarction as low risk or high risk in the Emergency Department (ED). Whether the HEART score can be used by paramedics to guide care were high-sensitivity cardiac troponin testing available in a prehospital setting is uncertain.

METHODS

In a prespecified secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study where paramedics enrolled patients with suspected myocardial infarction, a paramedic Heart, ECG, Age, Risk Factors (HEAR) score was recorded contemporaneously, and a prehospital blood sample was obtained for subsequent cardiac troponin testing. HEART and modified HEART scores were derived using laboratory contemporary and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assays. HEART and modified HEART scores of ≤3 and ≥7 were applied to define low-risk and high-risk patients, and performance was evaluated for an outcome of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) at 30 days.

RESULTS

Between November 2014 and April 2018, 1054 patients were recruited, of whom 960 (mean 64 (SD 15) years, 42% women) were eligible for analysis and 255 (26%) experienced a MACE at 30 days. A HEART score of ≤3 identified 279 (29%) as low risk with a negative predictive value of 93.5% (95% CI 90.0% to 95.9%) for the contemporary assay and 91.4% (95% CI 87.5% to 94.2%) for the high-sensitivity assay. A modified HEART score of ≤3 using the limit of detection of the high-sensitivity assay identified 194 (20%) patients as low risk with a negative predictive value of 95.9% (95% CI 92.1% to 97.9%). A HEART score of ≥7 using either assay gave a lower positive predictive value than using the upper reference limit of either cardiac troponin assay alone.

CONCLUSIONS

A HEART score derived by paramedics in the prehospital setting, even when modified to harness the precision of a high-sensitivity assay, does not allow safe rule-out of myocardial infarction or enhanced rule-in compared with cardiac troponin testing alone.

Rapid diagnostic strategies using high sensitivity troponin assays: what is the evidence and how should they be implemented?

The introduction of high sensitivity measurement of cardiac troponin T (hs cTnT) and cardiac troponin I (hs cTnI) has given the laboratory the ability to measure very low levels of cardiac troponin. The limit of detection of these assays is well below the 99th percentile. These low levels can also be measured with small values of imprecision. A range of algorithms combining presentation measurement with repeat sample intervals of as little as one to 2 hours have been developed. These are able to predict with acceptable accuracy the diagnosis that would be achieved with continued repeat sampling out to six to 12 hours from presentation. In this article, we review the evidence for the diagnostic accuracy of these approaches and the practical aspects of implementation into routine clinical practice.

The Ambulance Cardiac Chest Pain Evaluation in Scotland Study (ACCESS): A Prospective Cohort Study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine whether risk stratification in the out-of-hospital setting could identify patients with chest pain who are at low and high risk to avoid admission or aid direct transfer to cardiac centers.

METHODS

Paramedics prospectively enrolled patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome without diagnostic ST-segment elevation on the ECG. The History, ECG, Age and Risk Factors (HEAR) score was recorded contemporaneously, and out-of-hospital samples were obtained to measure cardiac Troponin I (cTnI) level on a point-of-care device, to allow calculation of the History, ECG, Age, Risk Factors, and Troponin (HEART) score. HEAR and HEART scores less than or equal to 3 and greater than or equal to 7 were defined as low and high risk for major adverse cardiac events at 30 days.

RESULTS

Of 1,054 patients (64 years [SD 15 years]; 42% women), 284 (27%) experienced a major adverse cardiac event at 30 days. The HEAR score was calculated in all patients, with point-of-care cTnI testing available in 357 (34%). A HEAR score less than or equal to 3 identified 32% of patients (334/1,054) as low risk, with a sensitivity of 84.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 80.7% to 89%), whereas a score greater than or equal to 7 identified just 3% of patients (30/1,054) as high risk, with a specificity of 98.7% (95% CI 97.9% to 99.5%). A point-of-care HEART score less than or equal to 3 identified a similar proportion as low risk (30%), with a sensitivity of 87.0% (95% CI 80.7% to 93.4%), whereas a score greater than or equal to 7 identified 14% as high risk, with a specificity of 94.8% (95% CI 92.0% to 97.5%).

CONCLUSION

Paramedics can use the HEAR score to discriminate risk, but even when used in combination with out-of-hospital point-of-care cTnI testing, the HEART score does not safely rule out major adverse cardiac events, and only a small proportion of patients are identified as high risk.

Risk stratifying chest pain patients in the emergency department using HEART, GRACE and TIMI scores, with a single contemporary troponin result, to predict major adverse cardiac events

Background

The majority of patients presenting to the ED with cardiac sounding chest pain have a non-diagnostic ECG and the problem of differentiating those suffering an acute coronary syndrome from those without is familiar to all ED clinical staff. To stratify risk in these patients, specific scores have been developed. Recent work has focused on incorporating newer high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays; however, issues regarding performance and availability of these assays remain.

Aim

Prospectively compare HEART, Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) scores, using a single contemporary cTn at admission, to predict a major adverse cardiac event (MACE) at 30 days.

Method

Prospective observational cohort study performed in a UK tertiary hospital in patients with suspected cardiac chest pain and no significant ST elevation on initial ECG. Data collection took place 2 December 2014 to 8 February 2016. The treating clinician recorded risk score data real time and a single contemporary cTn taken at presentation was used in score calculation. The primary endpoint was 30-day MACE. C-statistic was determined for each score and diagnostic characteristics of high-risk and low-risk cut-offs were calculated.

Results

189/1000 patients in the study developed a 30-day MACE. The c-statistic of HEART for 30-day MACE (0.87 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.90)) was higher than TIMI (0.78 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.81)) and GRACE (0.74 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.78)).

HEART score ≤3 identified low-risk patients with sensitivity 99.5% (95% CI 97.1% to 99.9%) and negative predictive value (NPV) 99.6% (95% CI 97.3% to 99.9%) exceeding TIMI 0 (sensitivity 97.4% (95% CI 93.9% to 99.1%) and NPV 97.8% (95% CI 94.8% to 99.1%)) and GRACE score 0–55 (sensitivity 95.2% (95% CI 91.1% to 97.8%) and NPV 95.8% (95% CI 92.2% to 97.7%)).

Conclusion

HEART outperformed both TIMI and GRACE in overall discriminative capacity for 30-day MACE. Using a single contemporary cTn at presentation, a HEART score of ≤3 demonstrated sensitivity and NPV of ≥99.5% for 30-day MACE. These results reach the threshold for a safe discharge strategy but should be interpreted thoughtfully in light of other work.

Analytical validation of novel cardiac biomarkers used in clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Blood-based biomarkers such as cardiac troponin and B-natriuretic peptides are widely used in clinical practice for the diagnosis, rule out, and risk stratification for patients with acute coronary syndromes and heart failure. Because neither these nor any other laboratory test meets all clinical needs, there are many novel biomarkers that are proposed and evaluated each year for possible implementation into clinical practice. Results of clinical trials are used as a means to validate their effectiveness and to obtain regulatory approval.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Novel biomarkers are discovered through a targeted approach using knowledge of the pathophysiology disease process and an untargeted approach where proteins from tissues or blood of disease patients are compared against healthy subjects or those with benign conditions. Once a candidate biomarker has been identified, it is important to understand where the protein is located and how it is released into blood. In designing trials, the requirements for Food and Drug Administration clearance and approval should be taken into consideration. There are preanalytical studies that should be considered including the preservative used to collect samples and in vivo and in vitro analyte stability. If the analyte is not stable, a surrogate marker could be used such as stable "pro" molecules (precursor proteins) may be preferred. Assay imprecision and bias, biological variation and criteria for the establishment of a reference range are important analytical attributes. The need for harmonization and commutability and correlation of results to other markers and clinical outcomes are important postanalytical attributes of novel biomarkers.

CONCLUSIONS

Inadequate adherence to these variables when conducting clinical trials reduces the quality and value of the information contained in literature reports of novel serum/plasma-based biomarkers.

Rapid exclusion of acute myocardial infarction in patients with undetectable troponin using a sensitive troponin I assay

Objective

With a high-sensitivity troponin assay, it may be possible to exclude acute myocardial infarction with a single blood test on arrival in the emergency department by using a novel ‘rule out’ cut-off set at the limit of detection of the assay. We aimed to determine whether this can also be achieved using a contemporary sensitive troponin assay that does not meet ‘high-sensitivity’ criteria.

Methods

In a prospective diagnostic cohort study, we included patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected cardiac chest pain. For this secondary analysis, serum samples drawn on arrival were tested using a contemporary sensitive troponin I assay (s-cTnI; Siemens Ultra ADVIA Centaur, 99th percentile 40 ng/L, limit of detection 6 ng/L). Acute myocardial infarction was adjudicated by two independent investigators based on reference standard troponin testing ≥12 h after symptom onset.

Results

Of 414 participants, 70 (16.9%) had acute myocardial infarction and 205 (49.5%) had initial s-cTnI concentrations below the limit of detection. Using the limit of detection as a ‘rule out’ cut-off gave a sensitivity of 94.3% (95% CI 86.0–98.4%) for acute myocardial infarction. If only patients with s-cTnI below the limit of detection and no electrocardiogram ischaemia were considered to have acute myocardial infarction ‘ruled out’ (41.8% of the cohort, n = 174), sensitivity would rise to 97.1% (90.1–99.7%) and negative predictive value to 98.8% (95.9–99.9%).

Conclusions

Acute myocardial infarction cannot be excluded in patients with s-cTnI concentrations below the limit of detection using the contemporary sensitive assay evaluated. Future work with this assay should focus on serial sampling over 1–3 h and combination with clinical information and/or additional biomarkers.

Troponin assays in the assessment of the equine myocardium

In 2000, troponin assays were adopted as the test of choice for detection of myocardial injury in man. This decision was made after extensive testing and followed a 60 year search for a biomarker of myocardial damage with sufficient analytical sensitivity and specificity. This has led to proliferation of assays for use in human medicine, each requiring extensive testing and validation before it could be made available on the open market for human use. The search for ever-more analytically sensitive assays and for a standard reference material continues. The adoption of troponin testing in veterinary medicine followed shortly after its development for use in man, providing a much-needed means of detecting and monitoring myocardial damage in horses. However, application of these tests in veterinary medicine has exclusively involved use of assays designed for and clinically validated in human patients. There is no mandated requirement for test validation in veterinary medicine and, while many of these assays have been shown to be capable of detecting equine troponin, the wide diversity of available tests, lack of validation, absence of protocols for their use and lack of standardisation make their application problematic. The objective of this review article is to address this issue, offering guidance where data are available and encouraging caution where there are none. Ultimately, the overall goal of this review is to examine critically the use of troponin assays in the horse and to promote the accurate and appropriate interpretation of valid results.

The global need to define normality: the 99th percentile value of cardiac troponin

BACKGROUND

How to select a presumably normal population for the establishment of 99th percentile cutoffs for cardiac troponin assays has not been adequately addressed. Lack of attention to this question can result in misleading medical decision cutoffs.

CONTENT

From our review of the peer-reviewed literature, including international recommendations, no uniform procedure is followed and no uniform guideline has been published by experts or regulatory agencies to guide researchers or manufacturers of cardiac troponin assays in their quest to define the health or "normality" of a reference population that is used to establish an accurate 99th percentile value. As we progress globally into the era of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays, we propose several suggested approaches to define presumably normal individuals by use of clinical and biomarker surrogates.

SUMMARY

Our uniform approach to defining who is normal and who may not be normal will help to define diagnostic and risk outcomes assessments in the management of patients with suspected myocardial injury, both for use in current clinical practice and clinical research, as well as for the potential future use of cardiac troponin in primary prevention.

Programmable bio-nanochip technology for the diagnosis of cardiovascular disease at the point-of-care

Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death in the world and continues to serve as the major contributor to healthcare costs. Likewise, there is an ever-increasing need and demand for novel and more efficient diagnostic tools for the early detection of cardiovascular disease, especially at the point-of-care (POC). This article reviews the programmable bio-nanochip (P-BNC) system, a new medical microdevice approach with the capacity to deliver both high performance and reduced cost. This fully integrated, total analysis system leverages microelectronic components, microfabrication techniques, and nanotechnology to noninvasively measure multiple cardiac biomarkers in complex fluids, such as saliva, while offering diagnostic accuracy equal to laboratory-confined reference methods. This article profiles the P-BNC approach, describes its performance in real-world testing of clinical samples, and summarizes new opportunities for medical microdevices in the field of cardiac diagnostics.

Analytical characteristics of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays

BACKGROUND

Cardiac troponins I (cTnI) and T (cTnT) have received international endorsement as the standard biomarkers for detection of myocardial injury, for risk stratification in patients suspected of acute coronary syndrome, and for the diagnosis of myocardial infarction. An evidence-based clinical database is growing rapidly for high-sensitivity (hs) troponin assays. Thus, clarifications of the analytical principles for the immunoassays used in clinical practice are important.

CONTENT

The purpose of this mini-review is (a) to provide a background for the biochemistry of cTnT and cTnI and (b) to address the following analytical questions for both hs cTnI and cTnT assays: (i) How does an assay become designated hs? (ii) How does one realistically define healthy (normal) reference populations for determining the 99th percentile? (iii) What is the usual biological variation of these analytes? (iv) What assay imprecision characteristics are acceptable? (v) Will standardization of cardiac troponin assays be attainable?

SUMMARY

This review raises important points regarding cTnI and cTnT assays and their reference limits and specifically addresses hs assays used to measure low concentrations (nanograms per liter or picograms per milliliter). Recommendations are made to help clarify the nomenclature. The review also identifies further challenges for the evolving science of cardiac troponin measurement. It is hoped that with the introduction of these concepts, both laboratorians and clinicians can develop a more unified view of how these assays are used worldwide in clinical practice.

Cardiac electromechanical delay is increased during recovery from 40 km cycling but is not mediated by exercise intensity

Cardiac electrical-mechanical delay (cEMD), left ventricular (LV) function, and cardiac troponin I (cTnI) were assessed after 40 km cycle time trials completed at high (HIGH) and moderate (MOD) intensities in 12 cyclists. Echocardiograms and blood samples were collected before, 10, and 60 min after cycling. cEMD as assessed by time from QRS onset to peak systolic (S') tissue velocity was lengthened after both bouts of cycling but was not mediated by cycling intensity (HIGH: 174 ± 52 vs 198 ± 26 ms; MOD: 151 ± 40 vs 178 ± 52 ms, P < 0.05). Global LV systolic function was unaltered by exercise. cEMD from QRS to peak early (E') diastolic tissue velocity was also increased post-exercise (HIGH: 524 ± 95 vs 664 ± 68 ms; MOD: 495 ± 62 vs 604 ± 91 ms, P < 0.05). Indices of LV diastolic function was reduced after cycling but were not mediated by exercise intensity. cTnI was elevated in two participants after HIGH trial (0.06 ug/L; 0.04 ug/L) and one participant after MOD trial (0.02 ug/L). While cEMD is lengthened and LV diastolic function was reduced post-cycling, altering time-trial intensity had little impact upon cEMD, LV function, and cTnI release.

Sensitive troponin assays

Sensitive troponin assays have been developed to meet the diagnostic goals set by the universal definition of myocardial infarction (MI). The analytical advantages of sensitive troponin assays include improved analytical imprecision at concentrations below the 99th percentile and the ability to define a reference distribution fully. Clinically, the improved sensitivity translates into the ability to diagnosis MI earlier, possibly within 3 h from admission and the ability to use the rate of change of troponin (Δ troponin) for diagnosis. Very sensitive assays may, in appropriately selected populations (perhaps with the addition of Δ troponin), allow diagnosis on hospital admission or within 1–2 h of admission. An elevated troponin level occurring in patients without suspected acute coronary syndromes has, in all studies to date in which outcome has been examined, been shown to indicate an adverse prognosis whatever the underlying clinical diagnosis. Failure of elevation means a good prognosis allowing early, safe hospital discharge, whereas a raised value requires investigation and should help prevent clinically significant pathology being overlooked. Sensitive troponins do present a challenge to the laboratory and the clinician. For the laboratory, the diagnosis of MI requires a change in troponin value. For the clinician, the challenge is to shift from a simplistic yes/no diagnosis of MI based on a single troponin value to a diagnosis that utilises early troponin changes as part of the clinical picture, and to relate the new class of detectable troponin elevation in patients with ischaemic myocardial disease to existing clinical guidelines and trial evidence.

Analytical characteristics of the Roche highly sensitive troponin T assay and its application to a cardio-healthy population

Background

It is desirable that current assays for cardiac troponin (cTn) are able to meet the recommended criterion that the diagnosis and risk assessment of patients present with symptoms of myocardial infarction requires a rise and fall in cTn with at least one point above the 99th percentile of a reference population. We have evaluated the analytical characteristics of the new highly sensitive troponin T (hs-TnT) assay to see if it meets this criterion and applied it to a carefully defined, cardio-healthy Australian reference population.

Methods

An imprecision profile was determined for the Roche hs-TnT assay (Roche Diagnostics, Sydney, Australia) using multiple samples analysed on nine separate occasions. The distribution of troponin T was determined using 104 samples from a cardio-healthy population.

Results

The new hs-TnT assay meets the specifications of a coefficient of variation of 10% at the 99th percentile of our cardio-healthy reference population. Of the 104 samples analysed 44 showed troponin T concentrations above the manufacturer's quoted limit of detection. Age and gender differences in the median and 99th percentile troponin T concentration were observed.

Conclusions

The new hs-TnT assay shows improved precision and sensitivity at very low troponin concentration. We have shown that a significant number of individuals in this cardio-healthy population had detectable circulating troponin concentration. With many apparently healthy people having detectable troponin, clinical judgement will become more important in interpreting troponin results.

Sensitive Cardiac Troponin Assays: Myth and Magic or a Practical Way Forward?

Cardiac troponins (cTn) are considered to be the ‘gold standard’ biomarkers for the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) a pathological spectrum which includes cardiac ischemia, angina, myocardial infarction and ultimately cardiac failure. The growing evidence base for the diagnostic and prognostic use of cTn in ACS has resulted in a universal redefinition of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). A diagnosis of AMI includes the detection of an elevated cTn (or CK-MB) with at least one measurement within 24 hours of the cardiac episode being >upper 99th percentile of a reference population, in conjunction with evidence of myocardial ischemia. A number of high sensitivity immunoassays with claims of superior imprecision and a definable 99th percentile have been produced. Clinically, these have two important impacts. First, there is a drive to change the values into whole numbers by the application of a unit change which carries the scope for confusion. Secondly, the near-normal Gaussian distribution of sensitive cTn in healthy subjects will increase the frequency of cTn positivity in the non-ACS population. The problem is to decipher if such minor elevations in cTn are of clinical concern. What is certain is that AMI remains a clinical not a biochemical diagnosis and the interpretation of cTn concentrations should be made according to the clinical context.