Harmonization of Clinical Laboratory Test Results: The Role of the IVD Industry.
At the start of the 21st century, a dramatic change occurred in the clinical laboratory community. Concepts from Metrology, the science of measurement, began to be more carefully applied to the in vitro diagnostic (IVD) community, that is, manufacturers. A new appreciation of calibrator traceability evolved. Although metrological traceability always existed, it was less detailed and formal. The In Vitro Diagnostics Directive (IVDD) of 2003 required manufacturers to provide traceability information, proving assays were anchored to internationally accepted reference materials and/or reference methods. The intent is to ensure comparability of patient test results, regardless of the analytical system used to generate them. Results of equivalent quality allows for the practical use of electronic health records (EHRs) capture a patient's complete laboratory test history and allow healthcare providers to diagnose and treat patients, confident the test results are suitable for correct interpretation, i.e., are "fit for purpose" and reflect a real change in a patient's condition and not just "analytical noise." The healthcare benefits are obvious but harmonization of test systems poses significant challenges to the IVD Industry. Manufacturers must learn the theory of metrological traceability and apply it in a practical manner to assay calibration schemes. It's difficult to effect such a practical application because clinical laboratories do not test purified analytes using reference measurement procedures but instead deal with complex patient samples, e.g., whole blood, serum, plasma, urine, etc., using "field methods." Harmonization in the clinical laboratory is worth the effort to achieve optimal patient care.
Director, Clinical Chemistry Scientific Leadership, Abbott Diagnostics.
Dave
D
Armbruster
Chief Scientific Officer, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Inc.
James
J
Donnelly
harmonization; metrology; standardization; traceability
Ann Clin Biochem. 2011 May;48(Pt 3):195-7
21555538
Clin Chem. 2011 Aug;57(8):1108-17
21677092
Clin Chim Acta. 2014 May 15;432:148-56
24333615
Clin Biochem. 2009 Mar;42(4-5):236-40
19863912
Clin Chim Acta. 2006 Jun;368(1-2):160-7
16516877
Ann Clin Biochem. 2011 Sep;48(Pt 5):393-409
21795407
Clin Chim Acta. 2014 May 15;432:55-61
24291059
Clin Biochem Rev. 2007 Aug;28(3):97-104
17909614
Clin Chem. 2013 Sep;59(9):1291-3
23780914
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2013 May;51(5):973-9
23525873
Clin Biochem Rev. 2012 Aug;33(3):95-100
22930604
Clin Chem. 2013 Feb;59(2):335-7
23243221
Ann Clin Biochem. 2011 Nov;48(Pt 6):487-8
22045648
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2013 Apr;51(4):741-51
23435100
Clin Chim Acta. 2014 May 15;432:49-54
24412319
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008 May;132(5):838-46
18466033