METHOD VALIDATION CASE

Similar documents
METHOD VALIDATION CASE

METHOD VALIDATION: WHY, HOW AND WHEN?

Validation Case studies: the good, the bad and the molecular

Method Comparison Report Semi-Annual 1/5/2018

Forum for Collaborative HIV Research External Validation of CD4 and Viral Load Assays Paris, France June 29, 2007

SCIEX Vitamin D 200M Assay for the Topaz System

Evaluation Report: Eurolyser CRP test (ST0100 and ST0102) on. CUBE analyser (CA0100)

Basic knowledge of POCT instuments. The Tide Resort Bangsan Beach 18 June 2009

LIPASE liquicolor. Design Verification. Multipurpose Reagent

Performance Characteristics of a New Single-Sample Freezing Point Depression Osmometer

Guide to Fulfillment of Measurement Uncertainty

The Virtues and Pitfalls of Implementing a New Test

USING THE ACCESS AMH ASSAY IN YOUR LABORATORY

liquicolor (AMP Buffer, IFCC) Design Verification

Hemostasis Test Validation, Performance and Reference Intervals

Manual. Transfer step. Figure 1. Workflow comparison of manual phenylalanine assay and automated GSP Neonatal Phenylalanine assay

Technical Bulletin No. 161

Statistical Considerations: Study Designs and Challenges in the Development and Validation of Cancer Biomarkers

Diagnostic reagent for quantitative in vitro determination of Urea / Blood Urea Nitrogen in serum, plasma and urine by colorimetry.

A Practical Example of CLSI C60 in Action: Vitamins and Hormones

510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY ASSAY ONLY TEMPLATE

25-Hydroxy Vitamin D TOTAL (25HD) on Liaison XL

Technical Bulletin No. 162

510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY ASSAY AND INSTRUMENT COMBINATION TEMPLATE

liquicolor Design Verification

Case Studies, or Verification Vignettes

Individual Lab Report Ci-Trol Nov,2016. Abnormal Fibrinogen (mg/dl) Abnormal Fbg Control - Lot# LFC Your Lab

GUIDE TO THE EVALUATION OF COMMUTABILITY OF CONTROL MATERIALS

BÜHLMANN fcal turbo. Calprotectin turbidimetric assay for professional use. Reagent Kit B-KCAL-RSET. Revision date:

Quantitative Method for Amphetamines, Phentermine, and Designer Stimulants Using an Agilent 6430 LC/MS/MS

Gentian Canine CRP Immunoassay Application Note for Abbott Architect * c4000

GLUH PRINCIPLE REF B ANNUAL REVIEW Reviewed by. Date. Date INTENDED USE

INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL ( Q I C) QC)

Validation Report for the Neogen Fentanyl Kit for ELISA Screening of Whole Blood and Urine Specimens

Bovine Insulin ELISA

Insulin ELISA. For the quantitative determination of insulin in serum and plasma

It s a Gas! Issues in the Blood Gas Laboratory. D. Robert Dufour, MD, FCAP Consultant Pathologist VA Medical Center, Washington DC

Hexagon PSA. Design Verification. Contents

Insulin ELISA. For the quantitative determination of insulin in serum and plasma.

Analysis of Testosterone, Androstenedione, and Dehydroepiandrosterone Sulfate in Serum for Clinical Research

White Paper, Evaluation of WaveSense JAZZ Blood Glucose Monitoring System Analytical Performance to EN ISO 15197:2015 Standard

Summary of Analytical Method for Quantitative Estimation of Fingolimod and Fingolimod Phosphate from Human Whole Blood Samples

Compliance Issues in Off-Label Use of Blood Glucose Monitors

1. PROTOCOL. Comparison Study Summary. Tuality Healthcare 324 SE 9 th Ave. Suite E Hillsboro, OR July 30, 2014

Instructions for Use. Tg Antibody ELISA

1 Introduction Imprecision Within-run imprecision, results Day-to-day imprecision, results... 2

Urea Nitrogen (BUN) detection Kit

Sponsored and reviewed by ICCS Quality and Standards Committee Title: Verification of PNH assay sensitivity through spiking experiment Written by:

Glucose Analytical Comparability Evaluation of the YSI 2300 STAT Plus and YSI 2900D Biochemistry Analyzers

Porcine/Canine Insulin ELISA

Bias in clinical chemistry. Elvar Theodorsson EFLM and Linköping University

HbA1c (Human) ELISA Kit

25OH Vitamin D Total ELISA

It s Just a Waived Glucose, Isn t It?

Rat Insulin ELISA. For the quantitative determination of insulin in rat serum and plasma. For Research Use Only. Not For Use In Diagnostic Procedures.

Polymer Technology Systems, Inc. CardioChek PA Comparison Study

See external label 2 C-8 C Σ=96 tests Cat # 3171Z. Free Estriol. Cat # 3171Z. Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay

Mouse GLP-2 EIA. Cat. No. KT-374. For the quantitative determination of GLP-2 in mouse serum or plasma. For Research Use Only. 1 Rev.

hc Step Serum/Urine, hc Step Detector and HumaPreg Serum/Urine

The analytical phase

DetectX. Urinary Creatinine Detection Kit. Catalog Number K002-H1. Sample Types Validated: Human, Monkey, Dog, Rat and Mouse Urine

G. Snodgrass, K. Ackles, A. Blanco and A. Versaggi Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Rochester, NY 14626

SAMPLE. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute Advancing Quality in Health Care Testing

IDEXX Catalyst One Chemistry Analyzer for In-house Measurement of Total Thyroxine (TT 4 ) Concentration in Serum from Dogs and Cats

Design Verification IMTEC-TSH R -A C Intended Use... 2 Diagnostic Sensitivity and Diagnostic Specificity... 2 Interferences... 4 Imprecision...

CYTOMEGALOVIRUS (CMV) IgM ELISA Kit Protocol

2014 Continuing Compliance Master Series Best Practices in Alternative Assessment of Performance

IMTEC-ANA-LIA MAXX. Design Verification

Two Important Statistics

Chymotrypsin ELISA Kit

(a) y = 1.0x + 0.0; r = ; N = 60 (b) y = 1.0x + 0.0; r = ; N = Lot 1, Li-heparin whole blood, HbA1c (%)

Insulin (Porcine/Canine) ELISA

Rat C-peptide ELISA. For the quantitative determination of C-peptide in rat serum

Gentian Canine CRP Immunoassay Application Note for scil VitroVet*

Cortisol (Sheep) ELISA Kit

QMS TACROLIMUS APPLICATION BECKMAN COULTER AU480 /AU680 /AU5800

Analytical method validation. Presented by Debbie Parker 4 July, 2016

EXOTESTTM. ELISA assay for exosome capture, quantification and characterization from cell culture supernatants and biological fluids

Active-B12 (Holo-TC) ELISA KIT

02006B 1 vial 02006B 1 vial Store at -20 C. Lyophilized recombinant IL-2

Addressing error in laboratory biomarker studies

Determination of Ethanol in Breath and Estimation of Blood Alcohol Concentration with Alcolmeter S-D2

System accuracy evaluation of FORA Test N Go Blood Glucose Monitoring System versus YSI 2300 STAT Plus glucose analyzer following ISO 15197:2013

GlucoMen LX PLUS blood glucose and blood ketone meter. Accuracy Evaluation to New ISO 15197:2013, with Technical and Specification Data

Performance Guide. icheck Iodine The test kit to measure iodine in salt

Aina Blood Monitoring System

Total Thyroxine ELISA (T4)

CHAPTER 2 SIMULTANEOUS DETRMINATION OF ANASTROZOLE AND TEMOZOLOMIDE TEMOZOLOMIDE CAPSULES 20 MG AND ANASTROZOLE TABLETS 1 MG

Rubella virus IgG ELISA Kit

Evaluation of the EUROLYSER-SOLO Total T4 assay. for veterinary samples

Research Article Derivative Spectrophotometric Method for Estimation of Metformin Hydrochloride in Bulk Drug and Dosage Form

PKU (Phenylketonuria) Serum HPLC Analysis Kit User Manual

WHO Prequalification of Diagnostics Programme PUBLIC REPORT

Technical Bulletin. Cholesterol Reference Method Laboratory Network (CRMLN) Overview. TB Rev. 0

Hexagon OBTI. Design Verification. Contents

EliKine Free Thyroxine (ft4) ELISA Kit

Molecular diagnosis of infectious disease - Method validation and environmental setting 傳染病的分子診斷 - 方法確認與環境背景. WC Yam 任永昌

Determination of hemoglobin is one of the most commonly

1,25 Dihydroxyvitamin D

Rat Proinsulin ELISA

Transcription:

METHOD VALIDATION CASE

METHOD VALIDATION PROTOCOL CLIA Regulation 493.1253 (2) 1.Accuracy (closeness to true/comparative method) 2.Precision (reproducibility) 3.Reference Interval 4.Reportable range (linearity, AMR= Analytical Measurement Range, CRR= clinical reportable range) 5.Analytical sensitivity- (lower limit) 6.Analytical specificity (interferences)

1. ACCURACY Agreement between test result and true result Bias Bias: a measure of trueness- Systematic error 2 ways: CLSI-EPI15-A2 Run 20 samples within testing range both new and comparative method Compare with Deming Regression model or Passing Bablock Regression Model CLSI-EP09-A2 Analyze minimum 40 samples by both new and comparative method over the clinically meaningful range Duplicate measurement by test method and comparative method Difference between the test method & comparative method measured as BIAS Compare the average bias between the two methods with manufacturer s claims for allowable limit Otherwise check CLIA limits/reference books for clinically allowable limits Systematic error Affects Accuracy Caused by (examples): bad calibrators, bad reagents, bad pipettes, interference

1. ACCURACY Glucose Nomor Nilai Nilai Selisih % bias 1 96 100 (4) -3.75 2 100 99 1 1.20 3 103 101 2 1.94 4 105 100 5 4.76 5 101 101 0 0.20 6 101 100 1 0.89 7 99 98 1 0.61 8 100 98 2 2.40 9 104 101 3 3.08 10 99 99-0 11 100 97 3 2.80 12 100 99 1 1.40 13 101 96 5 4.85 14 99 98 1 1.41 15 99 98 1 1.21 16 100 101 (1) -0.90 17 99 100 (1) -1.11 18 101 100 1 0.59 19 102 102 (0) -0.20 20 99 99 (0) -0.30 21 99 101 (2) -1.82 22 100 101 (1) -1.20 23 99 99 (0) -0.40 24 97 101 (4) -3.81 25 103 100 3 3.01 26 101 100 1 1.29 27 97 99 (2) -2.27 28 100 99 1 1.20 29 98 99 (1) -1.22 30 101 101 1 0.50 31 101 99 2 1.88 32 99 100 (1) -0.51 33 98 100 (2) -2.35 34 100 100 1 0.50 35 100 98 2 2.30 36 106 100 6 5.38 37 102 103 (1) -0.49 38 99 101 (2) -2.42 39 100 102 (2) -1.70 40 99 103 (4) -4.24 Level 1 AVG % bias = 0.37 Nomor Nilai Nilai Selisih % bias 1 233 240 (7) -2.83 2 237 239 (2) -0.68 3 251 244 7 2.91 4 245 238 7 2.86 5 234 236 (2) -1.03 6 238 237 2 0.63 7 244 240 5 1.84 8 244 243 1 0.45 9 253 244 9 3.68 10 242 242-0 11 241 241 (0) -0.12 12 240 239 1 0.38 13 243 234 9 3.83 14 240 235 5 2.25 15 239 233 6 2.68 16 238 242 (4) -1.55 17 241 243 (2) -0.87 18 241 240 1 0.41 19 245 241 4 1.51 20 240 244 (4) -1.58 21 238 243 (5) -2.23 22 238 236 2 0.84 23 237 233 4 1.60 24 234 239 (5) -2.18 25 237 237 (0) -0.17 26 239 242 (3) -1.42 27 241 245 (4) -1.54 28 239 237 2 0.88 29 236 241 (5) -1.91 30 242 239 3 1.07 31 239 237 2 0.67 32 240 242 (2) -0.67 33 238 239 (1) -0.29 34 238 242 (4) -1.85 35 243 240 3 1.40 36 240 231 9 3.92 37 249 241 8 3.29 38 240 239 1 0.33 39 240 243 (3) -1.25 40 245 240 5 2.08 Level 2 AVG % bias = 0.43 CLIA Allowable Bias = 10%

2. PRECISION Express in SD or CV of the set of replicates Within run precision Patient or QC samples assayed 20 times on the same day within the same run If precision poor, no need to do further evaluation Between run precision Patient or QC samples once per day for 20 days Samples at least 2-3 levels medical decision points

2. PRECISION What s good precision? Depends on the analyzer and the analyte 5% CV considered good Random error affects precision May be caused by (for example): Variability in volume of sample or reagent delivered Changes in environment Incosistent handling of materials

3. REFERENCE INTERVAL Adopted Reference Limits Manufacturer suggested Reference laboratory Reference text Books / Articles

3. REFERENCE INTERVAL Validating a refence range: The number of samples needed if age/sex not a factor: Verification of manufacturer s range N 20 Used if using the manufacturer s range and the test will be used in the exact manner described by the manufacturer CLSI C28-A2: Test 20 healthy individuals: If 2 samples outside proposed limits, validated If > 2 samples outside, can repeat with another 20, and accept if 2 samples outside Not worth repeat if > 5 samples outside proposed limits If not validated, will need to establish own reference limits Estimated a reference range, N=40-60 Used if the manufacturer s range is not adequate or if the use of the test not conform exactlt to the manufacturer s intended use Establish a reference range, N 120 Non FDA approved test or if there will be significant changes to the use of method Briefly, need 120 individuals (200 if does not follow Gaussian distribution) to be confident in accuracy Need to have criteria for inclusion and exclusion

4. REPORTABLE RANGE Validation of reportable range Minimum of 3 test specimens (4-5 better), measured in duplicate or triplicate Use appropriate matrix / traceable standards Well established target concentrations Concentration near the low, midpoint and high values of the Analytical Measurement Range (AMR) Run from lowest to highest ( to avoid carryover) Pipetting accuracy and precision is critical

AMR VS MD/C OR CRR Analyticial Measurement Range (AMR) Range of analytes that a method can directly measure w/o modification ( no dilutions, concentrations, other pretratements) Maximum Dilution/ Concentration (MD/C) formerly Clinical Reportable Range (CRR) Range of analyte values which are clinically significant After modification (dilution, concentration, etc) Value higher than AMR: report as > X or dilute Value lower than AMR: report as < X or concentrate

5. ANALYTICAL SENSITIVITY Also called lower detection limit 2 steps: determination of values obtained with blank samples and values obtained with low level positive samples Blank samples often use the zero calibrator for an assay Low level positive samples identified at or only slightly above the manufacturer s stated analytical sensitivity CLSI EPI 17-A describes: Run 20 blanks or low level samples; if < 3 exceed stated blank value, accept that value

Expected range < 1 mg/dl Sampel no Sample Glucose 1 BLANK 0 2 BLANK 0 3 BLANK 0 4 BLANK 0 5 BLANK 0 6 BLANK 0 7 BLANK 0 8 BLANK 0 9 BLANK 0 10 BLANK 0 11 BLANK 0 12 BLANK 0 13 BLANK 0 14 BLANK 0 15 BLANK 0 16 BLANK 0 17 BLANK 0 18 BLANK 0 19 BLANK 0 20 BLANK 0

6. ANALYTIC INTERFERENCES Most commonly, involves listing stated interferences from manufacturer and evaluating samples in correlation studies for differences (outliers), investigation of causes of interferences If any outliers during method comparison study with test method, laboratory can check the interfering substances

6. ANALYTIC INTERFERENCES Added volume < 10% Run in duplicates Calculate the bias: Bias = (sample +interference) baseline samples (sample+buffer/water)

Method evaluation should also ensure that the magnitude of the errors affecting the results are acceptable Evaluate the Total Error (TE) in the assay TE = Random Error (RE) + Systematic Error (SE) Example: Glucose Acceptable performance = 10% (CLIA) Xc= 200 mg/dl Ea (Allowable Error) = 20 mg/dl Random Error (RE) From an inter assay precision study, SD= 200 mg/dl was 3.5 mg/dl RE = 4 SD = 4(3.5) = 14 mg/dl Systematic Error (SE) From linear regression for glucose Yc = 0.997(200)-0.34 = 199.06 SE = [Yc-Xc} = [200.00-199.06] = 0.94 mg/dl TE = RE+ SE = 14+0.94 = 14.94 mg/dl

Y value = (SD/ Ea) *100 % = (0.94/20)* 100% = 4,7% X value = (Bias/ Ea)* 100% = (3.5/20) * 100% = 17.5%