Reference change value and measurement uncertainty in the evaluation of tumor markers

被引:3
作者
Yavuz, Hatice Bozkurt [1 ]
Bildirici, Mehmet Akif [2 ]
Yaman, Huseyin [3 ]
Karahan, Suleyman Caner [3 ]
Aliyazicioglu, Yuksel [3 ]
Orem, Asim [3 ]
机构
[1] Sebinkarahisar State Hosp, Giresun, Turkey
[2] Dogubayazit Doc Dr Yasar Eryilmaz State Hosp, Agri, Turkey
[3] Karadeniz Tech Univ, Dept Clin Biochem, Fac Med, Trabzon, Turkey
关键词
Uncertainty; reference values; tumor markers; reference change value AFP; CA; 125; 15-3; 19-9; CEA; BIOLOGICAL VARIATION; OVARIAN-CANCER; SERUM; CA-19-9; CA-125; LIMITS;
D O I
10.1080/00365513.2021.1979244
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
The use of measurement uncertainty among clinical laboratories becomes widespread. Measurement uncertainty can be reported with the result, as well as be used in certain reference change value (RCV) calculation equations. RCV is especially recommended for use in tests with a low individuality index. In our study, we calculated the measurement uncertainty of AFP, CA 125, CA 15-3, CA 19-9, CEA tumor markers with the ISO TS 20914:2019. We compared results with limits. Two Beckman Coulter DXI-800 (Minnesota, USA) autoanalysers' results were used. We calculated the RCV values using the classical Fraser method, logarithmic Lund Method, and Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) method as Minimal Difference (MD). We found the same permissible measurement uncertainty limit as 15.97% for all five tumor markers. The highest RCV value was found as 90% upstream for AFP test with Lund logarithmic approach, the lowest RCV value was found as 12% for CEA with MD, all other RCV results were between these two values. We do not recommend the use of MD, as values for Biological variation are not used in the MD approach. We also recommend using the logarithmic approach, although it gives higher results. There are also clinical studies on the significance of tumor markers in a follow-up that show different results. These differences may be because the studies are conducted with different systems. Therefore, each laboratory needs to calculate its own RCV values. We also recommend informing the clinicians about the tests with high measurement uncertainty.
引用
收藏
页码:601 / 605
页数:5
相关论文
共 29 条
  • [1] Adams T.M., 2002, Am. Assoc. Lab. Accredit. Man, V10, P1
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2007, J ONCOL PRACT, V3, P336, DOI [10.1200/JOP.0768504, 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.2364]
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2019, 20914 ISO TS
  • [4] CA19-9 for detecting recurrence of pancreatic cancer
    Azizian, Azadeh
    Ruehlmann, Felix
    Krause, Tanja
    Bernhardt, Markus
    Jo, Peter
    Koenig, Alexander
    Kleiss, Mathias
    Leha, Andreas
    Ghadimi, Michael
    Gaedcke, Jochen
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2020, 10 (01)
  • [5] Badrick Tony, 2005, Clin Biochem Rev, V26, P155
  • [6] Bialecki Eldad S, 2005, HPB (Oxford), V7, P26, DOI 10.1080/13651820410024049
  • [7] Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute, 2012, CLSI document EP29-A
  • [8] Collective opinion paper on findings of the 2010 convocation of experts on laboratory quality
    Cooper, Greg
    DeJonge, Niels
    Ehrmeyer, Sharon
    Yundt-Pacheco, John
    Jansen, Rob
    Ricos, Carmen
    Plebani, Mario
    [J]. CLINICAL CHEMISTRY AND LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2011, 49 (05) : 793 - 802
  • [9] CA 15-3 and related mucins as circulating markers in breast cancer
    Duffy, MJ
    [J]. ANNALS OF CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY, 1999, 36 : 579 - 586
  • [10] Biological variation and reference change values of CA 19-9, CEA, AFP in serum of healthy individuals
    Erden, G.
    Barazi, A. O.
    Tezcan, G.
    Yildirimkaya, M. M.
    [J]. SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL & LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2008, 68 (03) : 212 - 218