We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Validation Study
Standardization of Free Thyroxine Measurements Allows the Adoption of a More Uniform Reference Interval.
Clinical Chemistry 2017 October
BACKGROUND: The IFCC Committee for Standardization of Thyroid Function Tests intended to standardize free thyroxine (FT4 ) immunoassays. We developed a Système International d'Unités traceable conventional reference measurement procedure (RMP) based on equilibrium dialysis and mass spectrometry. We describe here the latest studies intended to recalibrate against the RMP and supply a proof of concept, which should allow continued standardization efforts.
METHODS: We used the RMP to target the standardization and reference interval (RI) panels, which were also measured by 13 manufacturers. We validated the suitability of the recalibrated results to meet specifications for bias (3.3%) and total error (8.0%) determined from biological variation. However, because these specifications were stringent, we expanded them to 10% and 13%, respectively. The results for the RI panel were reported as if the assays were recalibrated. We estimated all but 1 RI using parametric statistical procedures and hypothesized that the RI determined by the RMP was suitable for use by the recalibrated assays.
RESULTS: Twelve of 13 recalibrated assays had a bias, meeting the 10% specification with 95% confidence; for 7 assays, this applied even for the 3.3% specification. Only 1 assay met the 13% total error specification. Recalibration reduced the CV of the assay means for the standardization panel from 13% to 5%. The proof-of-concept study confirmed our hypothesis regarding the RI but within constraints.
CONCLUSIONS: Recalibration to the RMP significantly reduced the FT4 immunoassays' bias, so that the RI determined by the RMP was suitable for common use within a margin of 12.5%.
METHODS: We used the RMP to target the standardization and reference interval (RI) panels, which were also measured by 13 manufacturers. We validated the suitability of the recalibrated results to meet specifications for bias (3.3%) and total error (8.0%) determined from biological variation. However, because these specifications were stringent, we expanded them to 10% and 13%, respectively. The results for the RI panel were reported as if the assays were recalibrated. We estimated all but 1 RI using parametric statistical procedures and hypothesized that the RI determined by the RMP was suitable for use by the recalibrated assays.
RESULTS: Twelve of 13 recalibrated assays had a bias, meeting the 10% specification with 95% confidence; for 7 assays, this applied even for the 3.3% specification. Only 1 assay met the 13% total error specification. Recalibration reduced the CV of the assay means for the standardization panel from 13% to 5%. The proof-of-concept study confirmed our hypothesis regarding the RI but within constraints.
CONCLUSIONS: Recalibration to the RMP significantly reduced the FT4 immunoassays' bias, so that the RI determined by the RMP was suitable for common use within a margin of 12.5%.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app