Assuring The Quality Of Laboratory Testing In Countries - Presentation Transcript
Assuring the Quality of Laboratory Testing in Countries Fighting the HIV/AIDS Epidemic CDC November 29-30, 2000
Test Verification & Test Validation Niel T. Constantine, Ph. D. Professor of Pathology Director Clinical Immunology University of Maryland School of Medicine And Institute of Human Virology
Test Verification &Test Validation
Considerations when determining the utility of tests
A. Protocols for Evaluation of Tests
B. Reference Tests
C. Algorithms
D. Choice and Number of Samples
E. Testing Conditions
F. Resolution of Discordant Results
G. Indicators of test performance
Considerations When Determining the Utility of Tests Protocols for Evaluations of Tests
Protocols for Evaluation of Tests
Essential to set guidelines.
Must be followed exactly.
Must outline all characteristics of samples and procedures.
Must describe detailed algorithm to follow for discordant results.
Must include QA/QC section.
Considerations When Determining the Utility of Tests Reference Tests
Reference Tests
Needed to fully characterize samples.
Choice depends on purpose of testing.
Concordance – against reference screening test.
Accuracy – against confirmatory test.
Must be careful about “pre-selected samples” to evaluate false positives.
Should be tests that are recognized by the scientific community.
Considerations When Determining the Utility of Tests Algorithms
UNAIDS and WHO Recommended Alternative Algorithms
To maximize accuracy while minimizing cost
Depends on objectives of the test and the prevalence of infection
Table 2 UNAIDs and SHO reccommendations for HIV testing strategies Tableau 2 Recommandations de I’onusida et de I’OMS aux strategies according to test objective and prevalence of infection in the de depistage du VIH, en fonction de l’obectif du test et de la sample population prevalence de l’infection dans la population Objective of testing Prevalences of infections Testing strategy Objectif du d é pistage Pr é valences de l’infection Strat é gie de d é pistage Transfustion/transplant safety All Prevalences S écurité des transfusions/transplantations Toutes prévalences Surveillance >10% 10% Clinical signs/symptoms of >30% HIV Infection- Signnes Cliniques/symptôms de 30% l’infection à VIH a Asymptomatic >10% Asymptomatique 10% a World Health Organizaion, Intenm proposal for a WHO staging system for HIV infection and desease (WER no.29, 1990, pp 221-228)- Organisation mondiale de la sante. Echelle provisoire OMS proposee pour la determinationdes strades de l’infecrtiono VIH et de la malodie (REN no 29, 1990. P.221-228)
Considerations When Determining the Utility of Tests Choice and Number of Samples
Choice and Number of Samples
Samples:
Should represent population where test will be performed.
Same matrix of sample (e.g. plasma).
Must meet guidelines stated by manufacturer (e.g. not lipemic).
Avoid multiple freeze/thaw, etc.
Use “clean”samples.
Multiple aliquots if possible.
Must be well categorized.
Choice and Number of Samples
Samples:
Should represent population where test will be performed.
Same matrix of sample (e.g. plasma).
Must meet guidelines stated by manufacturer (e.g. not lipemic).
Avoid multiple freeze/thaw, etc.
Use “clean”samples.
Multiple aliquots if possible.
Numbers of Samples:
The more the better (min. 30 positives, 200 negatives).
Depends on purpose of testing (e.g. blood donors).
Include appropriate percent of variants.
Perform precision and reproducibility studies (lg. Volumes).
HIV Classification HIV HIV-1 HIV-2 O M A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J Types Clades ANT 70, MVP5180, VAU ROD NIH2 Groups Guidelines for Classification Types: HIV-1 and HIV-2 50% homology Subtypes/Groups: HIV-1 group M, N and O 60-70% homology Clades: HIV-1 Clades A-J >70% homology N
Considerations When Determining the Utility of Tests Testing Conditions
Testing Conditions
Must test under identical conditions.
(e.g. same lab, equipment, day, tech).
Use non-expired kits that have been properly stored.
Follow manufacturer’s recommendations.
Sample integrity.
Test in a blinded fashion.
Considerations When Determining the Utility of Tests Resolution of Discordant Results
Resolution of Discordant Results
Check sample integrity, labeling, paperwork, and procedures.
Repeat by same technologist.
Repeat blindly by another technologist.
Repeat reference test blindly.
Repeat at different laboratory.
Determine true status by other means.
What parameters would these investigate?
Resolution of Discordant Results Possible Variants
Synthetic peptide tests
Specific Western blots
Specific IFAs
Combination tests
Dot blots
Immunoconcentration tests
Augmented blots and LIA
PCR - specific
Rapid Assay Evaluation Algorithm Rapid Assay + ELISA - Rapid Assay - ELISA + Discordant Results Repeat Rapid & ELISA Western Blot Assay (FDA Licensed) Negative Indeterminate Positive Resolved IFA (FDA Licensed) Negative Indeterminate Positive Resolved Sample Volume > 1 mL Sample Volume (<1 mL & >0.2 mL) RT-PCR Assay Negative Positive Inconclusive Resolved P24 Ag Assay (FDA Licensed) Negative Positive Inconclusive Ag Neutralization Positive Negative Resolved Resolved
Considerations When Determining the Utility of Tests Indicators of Test Performance
Indicators of the Value of a Diagnostic Assay
Sensitivity
Specificity
Test efficiency
Delta values
Predictive values
Sensitivity of Tests
Sensitivity (epidemiologic)
Sensitivity (analytical)
Low titer
Seroconversion
Dilutions
Indicators of the Value of a Diagnostic Assay
Sensitivity = True Positives
True Positives + False Negatives
Specificity = True Negatives True Negatives + False Positives X 100% X 100%
Indicators of the Value of a Diagnostic Assay
Positive Predictive = True Positives
Value True Positives + False Positives
X 100% X 100% Negative Predictive = True Negatives Value True Negatives +False Negatives
Predictive Values
Assume: Test Sensitivity = 100% / Specificity = 99.5%
Population #1 , where the prevalence of infection is high (5%)
Population: 1000 sera tested
50 sera from infected individuals
950 sera from non-infected individuals
Test Results: 50 positives: 45 from the infected group
5 false pos from the non-infected group
Therefore, the positive predictive value is:
PPV = 45 = 90%
45+5
9 out of 10 positive results will be from infected persons
Predictive Values
Assume: Test Sensitivity = 100% / Specificity = 99.5%
Population #2 , where the prevalence of infection is low (0.7%)
Population: 1000 sera tested
7 sera from infected individuals
993 sera from non-infected individuals
Test Results: 7 positives: 2 from the infected group
5 false pos from the non-infected group
Therefore, the positive predictive value is:
PPV = 2 = 28.6%
2+5
Predictive Values
Therefore, the same test that yields the same number of false-positives produces a different positive predictive value when testing two different populations
Predictive Values
Therefore, the same test that yields the same number of false-positives produces a different positive predictive value when testing two different populations.
The chance of a positive result being from a truly infected individual in the low prevalence population is only 28.6% (2 true positive detected by the test and 5 false-positives).
Predictive Values
Therefore, the same test that yields the same number of false-positives produces a different positive predictive value when testing two different populations.
The chance of a positive result being from a truly infected individual in the low prevalence population is only 28.6% (2 true positive detected by the test and 5 false-positives).
This indicates that a positive result by the test will be from an infectd individual in only one of four cases (a guess could yield better chance!).
Test Verification &Test Validation
Quality Assurance and Errors
A. Common Errors
B. Quality Assurance Needs
1. Fundamentals of QA
2. Quality Control
3. Quality Assessment
4. Equipment Issues
5. 10 Key Issues for QA
Most Common Errors
Transcription
Carelessness
Procedures
Specimens
Environmental conditions
Pipettes and pipetting
Clerical Errors
Logging specimens
Aliquoting
Worksheets
Result printouts
Translating results
Computer entering
Reports
Supervisory Review
Specimen Problems
Insufficient volume for repeating
Hemolysis, lipemia, and bacterial contamination
Insufficient and inadequate labeling
Misidentified specimens
Frozen / Thawed (multiple)
Other Types of Errors
Kit Dependent Problems.
Technologist – dependent errors.
Inter-lot variations and Intra-lot variations.
Environmental problems.
Non repeatable results.
Inter-laboratory and Intra-laboratory variations.
Equipment problems.
Quality Assurance Fundamental for Quality Test Results
Record keeping
Monitoring laboratory staff
Vigilance in the laboratory
Verification of true positive and true negatives
Parallel testing of resubmitted samples
Reporting of results
Confidentiality
Interaction with physicians
Storage of specimens for follow-up testing
Laboratory efficiency
Total quality management
Components of Quality Control Record Keeping
Kit lot numbers (expiration and open dates).
Clearly label reagents with date opened or prepared (include open and expiration date) on each label.
Daily temperature monitoring and recording i.e. Incubators water baths, ambient.
Performance of controls and action taken when out-of-range.
Photograph or clear photocopies of Western blots.
Ratios of in-house controls to cut-off values.
Components of Quality Control Controls
Kit controls : Use as directed by the manufacturer.
In-house controls : preferably three levels to monitor variability between runs and lot numbers of kits.
Low positive – absorbance enough above cut-off that it should not be misclassified because of expected run-to-run variability.
High positive – well above the cut-off.
Negative – well below cut-off.
Storage of in-house control sera :
Dispense in aliquots sufficient for one week of use.
Freeze at -20 °C in a non-self-defrosting freezer.
Thaw each aliquot once, store at 4 °C when not in use, do not refreeze and discard after 1 week.
Trend Monitoring by External Controls Shift
Quality Assessment
Internal Quality Assessment
Known Reactors
Unknown Reactors
Blind Testing
External Quality Assessment
Proficiency Panels
Blind Proficiency Panels
Equipment Issues
Pipette Calibrations
ESSENTIAL FOR ACCURACY
Frequency
At least every 6 months
Reasoning
1 l inaccuracy = 10% error (total volume of 10 l)
Controls – o.k., borderline specimens – loss of sensitivity
Quality Assurance: What Must Be Done? 10 Key Issues
Detailed SOP with total compliance.
Supervising review of all paperwork.
Develop checklists for monitoring all activities.
Dev. Organizational schemes for processing, documentation, and assessment.
Monitor staff – blind proficiencies.
Neat and complete documentation of all results.
No deviation from procedures.
Maintain confidentiality.
Endorse safety measures.
Vigilance.
Test Verification &Test Validation III. Introduction of a New Test A. Selection B. Characteristics C. Approved versus Non-Approved tests D. Continual Monitoring
Selection
Availability
Appropriateness
Cost and bulk purchases
Shelf life and robustness
Storage
Publications and WHO evaluations
Regulations
Characteristics
Laboratory capabilities
Testing Purpose
Simplicity
Cost Concerns
Sample type
Test limitations
Test principles and antigens
Test indices
Approved Versus Non-approved Tests
Which can be used?
When approved tests are unavailable.
Validation of non-approved tests.
Documentation necessities and qualifications.
Continual Monitoring
Necessity to monitor new tests.
How long to monitor.
Methods of monitoring.
Looking for trends.
Changing tests – Parallel testing.
Documentation.
Test Verification &Test Validation IV. Special Considerations for Developing Countries A. Selection of Tests and algorithms B. Testing under non-optimal conditions. C. Best fit Strategies D. When Systems Fail
Special Considerations for Developing Countries Selection of Tests and Algorithms
Selection of Tests
Infrastructure
Supportability
Expertise
Accessibility
Cost Concerns
Algorithms
Algorithms
What’s effective?
What can be used?
Established and recommended algorithms.
Use of additional strategies.
Differences due to geographical origins of samples.
Cost effectiveness.
Sample pooling.
Blood donations vs. diagnostic testing.
Different algorithms within the same country.
Epidemiological testing.
Simple, Rapid Test Alternative Algorithm Rapid Test #1 Positive Negative P/N OR P/P Rapid Test #2* Repeat in Duplicate REPORT N/N REPORT Positive Negative REPORT indeterminate Resolve with other tests Report as Positive *Different configuration or antigens
Special Considerations for Developing Countries Testing Under Non-optimal Conditions
Testing Under Non-optimal Conditions
Use of expired kits.
Unsatisfactory environmental conditions.
Limited number of test kits.
Limited equipment (e.g. thermometers).
Non-calibrated pipettes.
Old equipment.
Poor integrity of samples.
Questionably labeled specimens.
Special Considerations for Developing Countries Best Fit Strategies
Best-fit Strategies (to Test or Not to Test?)
Consequences and necessities.
Cost effective strategies.
Pooling of samples.
Saving reagents.
Parallel testing.
Sequential testing.
Mixing reagents.
Alternate testing areas.
Testing when temperatures and conditions fail.
Pooling of Samples
In what situations can pooling be used?
How many samples can be pooled?
Accuracy.
Final sample dilution of pools.
Proper sample size for evaluation.
Effects of the presence of HIV Antigens.
Non-approved Testing Strategies
Re-use of rapid tests.
Modification of test kits:
Cutting WB strips.
Halving reagents.
Pooling of samples.
Special Considerations for Developing Countries When Test Systems Fail
0 comments
Post a comment