|
|
||||||||
Laboratory Management |
1
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, East Carolina University School of Medicine, Brody 7S-19, Greenville, NC 27858-4354.
2
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine,
Louisiana State University Medical Center, Box P51, 1901 Perdido
Street, New Orleans, LA 70112-1328.
a Author for correspondence. Fax 252-816-8200; e-mail kaz{at}brody.med.ecu.edu.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Kroll et al. (6) previously have shown that at least three types of interference can contribute to the overall interference effect. These three types of interference have been classified as analyte-dependent, where the magnitude of interference is dependent on the concentration of the analyte of interest; analyte-independent, where the degree of interference is constant regardless of the analyte concentration; and a combination of the first two, where the effect of an interferent is dependent upon both the concentration of analyte and interferent.
An experimental model for assessing the relative contribution of each of these three types of interference has been described (6). This technique offers a rigorous statistical approach for assessing interference and also provides insight into the mechanism of the interference. Unfortunately, routine implementation of the information derived using this approach for judging the acceptability of laboratory test results when an interferent is present is difficult. It is especially difficult in those cases where the interference is dependent on the concentration of analyte or on both the analyte and interferent concentrations.
The imminent widespread use of hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier solutions in patients requiring blood transfusion will require that clinical laboratories have mechanisms in place to evaluate the acceptability of specimens for analysis which contain this possible interferent. Hemoglobin-based blood substitutes may be given in amounts producing serum hemoglobin concentrations up to 50 g/L (7). Our investigations into the interference effects of diaspirin cross-linked hemoglobin chains (DCLHb; also known as HemAssist®; Baxter Healthcare Corp., Deerfield, IL) on laboratory testing methods using the method of Kroll et al. (6) have led to the development of a format for assessing interference that can be readily implemented in the clinical laboratory. We report on an easy-to-read two-dimensional graphical display that shows where clinically significant interference occurs as a function of analyte and interferent concentrations. In particular, we evaluated the interference effect of DCLHb on four different chemistry assays.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
reagents
DCLHb (lot no. 96F28AD11) and DCLHb diluent (lot no.
PBS-3-96-005A) were obtained from Baxter Healthcare. The DCLHb solution
contained 100 g/L hemoglobin. These products were stored at -70 °C
until use. Once thawed, DCLHb and DCLHb diluent were used within
24 h. Any product that remained was discarded if not used within
this time frame.
experimental design
We followed the protocol of Kroll et al. (6) for
assessing interference caused by the presence of DCLHb. For each
analyte we initially prepared two pools of serum: one containing the
analyte of interest at high concentration and one serum pool containing
the analyte at low concentration. The analyte concentrations in the low
and high serum pools used to make up the linear series of specimen
pools included, at a minimum, the 1% and 99% percentiles of patient
results reported in our laboratory. Four pools containing intermediate
concentrations of the analyte were prepared by making admixtures of the
low and high pools. The six resulting pools had concentrations of the
analyte of interest related in linear fashion. Next, each of the six
pools was subdivided into seven aliquots. The first aliquot from each
pool received DCLHb diluent not containing any hemoglobin, whereas the
six remaining aliquots had DCLHb added to achieve hemoglobin
concentrations of 2.5, 5.0, 7.5, 10.0, 15.0, and 20.0 g/L. The
concentrations of DCLHb that were evaluated spanned the range of DCLHb
likely to be encountered in patients receiving the product. Thus, for
each analyte we prepared 42 different samples: 6 pools of sera
containing the analyte of interest related in linear fashion, each of
which was further subdivided into 7 aliquots containing DCLHb diluent
or DCLHb. All aliquots were assayed in duplicate for the analyte of
interest within 4 h following their creation.
statistical analysis
Data analysis proceeded in two stages. The first stage involved
analysis of the test results using the experimental protocol for
assessing test interference described previously (6). Data
were processed using the PROC GLM program (Ver. 6.09, Statistical
Analysis System Institute Inc.) with the model: Result = B0 +
(B1 x Analyte) + (B2 x DCLHb) + (B3 x (Analyte
x DCLHb)) and the SAS program statement: RESULT = ANALYTE DCLHb
ANALYTE * DCLHb. The regression coefficients, B0, B1, B2, and B3, and
their standard errors were calculated. The coefficient B0 represents
the intercept obtained for the multiple regressions, whereas B1 is the
coefficient of the analyte variable. In our application, B0, the
intercept, should approximate zero. The B1 coefficient should
approximate unity, indicating that the method appropriately measures
the analyte of interest. The B2 coefficient represents the effect of
the interferent, DCLHb, whereas B3 is the coefficient of the variable
representing interaction between analyte and interferent, ANALYTE *
DCLHb.
A P value <0.01 was chosen a priori for statistical significance. Following the multiple regression analysis performed in stage one, the B2 and B3 coefficients were evaluated for statistical significance. If only one of the coefficients, B2 or B3, was statistically significant, then the nonsignificant variable was dropped from the regression model and a second regression was performed. For analytes where both the B2 and B3 coefficients were not statistically significant, no further data analysis was performed.
The second stage of data analysis involved an assessment of clinically significant interference caused by the presence of DCLHb, using the model equation obtained in stage one. The limits we used to define the presence of clinically significant interference for the analytes evaluated were those specified in the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA-88) (8). For each analyte, DCLHb interference was evaluated over a range of analyte concentrations that spanned the reportable range of the assay. First, the lowest analyte concentration to be evaluated was substituted into the model equation. Next, sequential DCLHb values, in increments of 0.1 g/L, were substituted into the model equation. A result, y0, was obtained from the model equation with the DCLHb concentration set to 0.0 g/L. A second result, yn, was obtained from the model equation at each 0.1 g/L incremental increase in DCLHb concentration. The difference in analyte concentration between y0 and yn was then calculated. If the difference in analyte concentration between y0 and yn exceeded the limit for allowable error as specified under CLIA-88, then clinically significant interference was deemed to be present. The analyte concentration and interferent concentration pair was tabulated. The entire process was then repeated by incrementing the analyte concentration by a value equal to the reporting increment for the particular analyte, substituting this new analyte value into the model equation, followed by substitution of incremental DCLHb concentrations into the model. Using this iterative process, we obtained multiple data pairs consisting of sequential analyte concentrations and the corresponding DCLHb concentration producing clinically significant interference.
The data pairs obtained in stage two of the data analysis were plotted with the interferent concentration as the abscissa and the analyte concentration, yn, as the ordinate. If the resulting curve, defined by the data pairs obtained in stage two, extended into a range of clinically relevant analyte concentrations, then significant interference was inferred to be present.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
DCLHb interfered with the measurement of calcium, cholesterol, and
total bilirubin, but did not interfere with measurement of potassium.
Although statistically significant interference by DCLHb was noted for
calcium, the magnitude of interference was not clinically significant.
Measurement of cholesterol and total bilirubin showed significant
statistical and clinical interference caused by the presence of DCLHb;
however, the type of interference was different for each. Table 2
gives the regression coefficients, R,
SE, and P values for each the four analytes we evaluated.
|
For calcium, only the B1 and B2 coefficients are statistically different from 0. As expected, the B1 coefficient is near unity, indicating that the method appropriately measures calcium. The B2 coefficient is statistically significant, whereas the B3 coefficient is not. This indicates that DCLHb interferes with the determination of calcium in a manner that is not dependent on calcium concentrations. However, although statistically significant interference from DCLHb is present, none of the DCLHb/calcium combinations caused the measured calcium results to be greater than ±0.25 mmol/L from the result that would be obtained if the specimen did not contain DCLHb, as determined by the model regression equation. Thus, although statistically significant interference was found in the presence of DCLHb, clinically significant interference for this analyte was not present.
For cholesterol, interference was dependent on the concentration of
DCLHb only. The B2 coefficient is significantly different from zero and
positive, indicating that the presence of DCLHb causes a positive bias
in the measurement of cholesterol concentrations. The B3 coefficient
was not significantly different from zero, indicating that the
interference by DCLHb with measurement of cholesterol was independent
of the concentration of cholesterol in the sample. The interference
effect of DCLHb is readily apparent in the interference plot for
cholesterol as seen in Fig. 1
A. The upward sloping line indicates that DCLHb interferes with
measurement of cholesterol. The linear nature of the line indicates
that the magnitude of the interference is proportional to the DCLHb
concentration and is not dependent on the concentration of cholesterol
in the specimen.
|
Measurement of total bilirubin was affected by the presence of DCLHb.
The interference effect observed was proportional to the concentration
of DCLHb, as well as the concentration of bilirubin. The presence of
DCLHb caused a positive bias in measured bilirubin, as evidenced by the
upward slope of the interference plot (Fig. 1B
). The nonlinear nature
of the plot reflects the interaction between bilirubin and DCLHb at
relatively low concentrations of the analyte (i.e., <70 µmol/L). At
bilirubin concentrations of ~70 µmol/L or greater, DCLHb up to 20.0
g/L did not cause clinically significant interference.
Measurement of potassium at all concentrations tested showed no statistically significant interference effect attributable to the presence of DCLHb. Only the B1 coefficient was significantly different from zero, as is to be expected if the assay is appropriately measuring potassium. Because no analyte-independent and analyte-dependent interference was associated with the presence of DCLHb, no interference plot was generated for potassium.
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Using the method of Kroll et al. (6), we evaluated the effect of various concentrations of DCLHb on four different analytes measured on the Hitachi 747. These four analytes were chosen because each demonstrates a unique type of interference effect. Interference studies performed using this experimental protocol are significantly more difficult to conduct, compared with other interference evaluations. The former require the measurement of multiple concentrations of analyte, with each concentration of analyte being subdivided into aliquots containing multiple concentrations of interferent. A minimum of four concentrations of analyte and interferent is required. In addition, the data obtained from the analyte/interferent matrix must then be evaluated with software capable of performing multiple regression analysis. Nevertheless, use of this approach in the investigation of interference effects provides considerable information concerning the interaction between analyte and interferent; information not usually obtained when standard interference protocols are used.
The utilization and implementation of interference data obtained using the protocol of Kroll et al. (6) in the routine clinical laboratory setting is difficult. These authors utilized three-dimensional response surface plots for illustrating the interaction of interferent and analyte at various concentrations of each. Although these three-dimensional plots allow one to appreciate the magnitude of interference that is influenced by concentrations of analyte and interferent, it is still extremely difficult to judge whether any bias caused by an interferent at a particular analyte concentration is clinically significant and might lead to inappropriate changes in patient management if reported to the physician. More recent attempts to graphically display interference data from multiple regressions analysis have led to the development of "contour" plots (12). These plots show the changes that occur in measured analyte concentration at a single concentration of analyte as a function of interferent concentration. A unique contour plot must be constructed for each particular concentration of analyte to demonstrate the effect of the interferent.
Expanding on these earlier studies, we developed a two-dimensional
interference plot that shows where clinically significant interference
occurs as a function of both analyte and interferent concentrations.
Interpretation of our interference plot simply requires knowledge of
the DCLHb concentration, measured independently, and the apparent
analyte concentration measured in the specimen. Plotting the DCLHb
concentration and apparent analyte concentration obtained from the
specimen on the interference plot enables one to determine if the
measured analyte result can be reported and be within the limits
specified under the CLIA-88 rules for clinically significant bias.
Thus, as seen in Fig. 1
, if the plotted DCLHb/analyte results for a
particular specimen are to the left of the interference plot line, then
the measured analyte concentration can be reported with the knowledge
that any measurement bias caused by the presence of DCLHb is less than
the criteria for allowable error specified in CLIA-88. However, if the
plotted results fall to the right of the interference plot line, then
one can be assured that the combination of DCLHb and analyte
concentrations in the specimen have yielded a test result bias that is
clinically significant.
The use of the limits for allowable error established under CLIA-88 for
judging the presence of clinically significant test interference
represented a compromise between the somewhat arbitrary use of the 10%
limits applied by some (9)(10) and the use of
more rigorous approaches for defining acceptable laboratory performance
advocated by others, such as use of total variance limits (including
analytical and biological variability), loss of diagnostic efficiency,
and use of medical-usefulness criteria (13)(14)(15)(16). Because the
requirements for test precision and accuracy may differ for different
clinical situations as well as whether a test is being used for
diagnostic or monitoring decisions, no single set of criteria for
delineating clinically significant interference will be acceptable in
all circumstances (17)(18). Thus, one advantage
in presenting interference data using the format we propose, in
addition to its ease of interpretation, is that different interference
plots can be constructed for the same analyte, using various limits for
clinically significant interference based on the clinical situation of
the patient. Fig. 2
shows the interference plots for cholesterol using guidelines
for maximum allowable error advocated by the National Cholesterol
Education Program (3%) (19), CLIA-88 (10%) (8),
and the German Federal Medical Association (18%) (20). As
can readily be seen in the interference plots, the more stringent the
criteria for allowable bias, the more likely that the presence of DCLHb
will preclude reporting of the measured value.
|
In summary, we present an easy-to-interpret visual format for judging the acceptability of laboratory test results when the quantity of an interfering substance is known. The visual format we present can also be automated once the multiple regression coefficients have been determined for a particular instrument and reagent combination and the maximum allowable bias attributable to presence of the interferent has been decided. One potential drawback to using our method for judging test acceptability is that it requires quantitative measurement of interferent concentrations in the specimen being analyzed. However, some of the clinical chemistry analyzers manufactured today have the ability to perform accurate quantitative measurements of interferents such as hemoglobin, bilirubin, and lipids by use of spectrophotometric techniques. The accuracy of the Hitachi 747 analyzer for measurement of hemoglobin concentrations has been verified by previous investigators (21). The imminent widespread use of hemoglobin-based blood substitutes makes it imperative that instrument manufacturers develop systems that can measure plasma or serum hemoglobin in a manner that is quantitative, precise, and linear over a useful range. The use of such systems coupled with use of detailed information regarding the effect of an interferent at various concentrations of analyte will enable more reliable reporting of laboratory test results and enable clinicians to be more confident about the accuracy of unexpected laboratory data (22).
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:
![]() |
A. A. Ali, G. S. Ali, J. M. Steinke, and A. P. Shepherd Co-Oximetry Interference by Hemoglobin-Based Blood Substitutes Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2001; 92(4): 863 - 869. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. J. Chance, E. J. Norris, and M. H. Kroll Mechanism of Interference of a Polymerized Hemoglobin Blood Substitute in an Alkaline Phosphatase Method Clin. Chem., September 1, 2000; 46(9): 1331 - 1337. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |