Charlotte Evans, Finlay MacKenzie, Rachel Marrington
{"title":"Variation in liver function testing and the effect of pyridoxal-5-phosphate on ALT, AST and FIB-4 results.","authors":"Charlotte Evans, Finlay MacKenzie, Rachel Marrington","doi":"10.1177/00045632241269741","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As one of the most requested profiles of blood tests, there is a need for standardization among liver function tests (LFT). Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) are key markers of hepatocellular injury. ALT and AST are used to calculate a Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) score for assessing liver fibrosis. Despite recommendations by the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) to include pyridoxal-5-phosphate in ALT and AST assay methodologies, most laboratories continue to omit this.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from the UK NEQAS for Clinical Chemistry Scheme, Distribution 1160 (November 2023), was reviewed to investigate variation in practice regarding liver blood tests in relation to ALT, AST and FIB-4. In addition, a series of questions audited laboratory practice in relation to liver enzymes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Wide variation was seen in LFT profiles offered by laboratories, with 32 different combinations of tests used. The IFCC-recommended methods for ALT and AST are used by one-third of laboratories and give significantly higher results than non-IFCC methods. Laboratories using IFCC methods also reported significantly higher FIB-4 scores. Reference ranges and cut-offs for these tests also varied, and did not account for method-related differences in results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The lack of standardization of LFTs can have a significant impact on patient care. The difference in results for ALT, AST and FIB-4 in laboratories not using IFCC-recommended methods may lead to misdiagnosis. This issue should be addressed by laboratories using methods including pyridoxal-5-phosphate. Until then, method-related reference ranges and cut-offs for ALT, AST and FIB-4 are required.</p>","PeriodicalId":8005,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Clinical Biochemistry","volume":" ","pages":"459-468"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Clinical Biochemistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00045632241269741","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: As one of the most requested profiles of blood tests, there is a need for standardization among liver function tests (LFT). Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) are key markers of hepatocellular injury. ALT and AST are used to calculate a Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) score for assessing liver fibrosis. Despite recommendations by the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) to include pyridoxal-5-phosphate in ALT and AST assay methodologies, most laboratories continue to omit this.
Methods: Data from the UK NEQAS for Clinical Chemistry Scheme, Distribution 1160 (November 2023), was reviewed to investigate variation in practice regarding liver blood tests in relation to ALT, AST and FIB-4. In addition, a series of questions audited laboratory practice in relation to liver enzymes.
Results: Wide variation was seen in LFT profiles offered by laboratories, with 32 different combinations of tests used. The IFCC-recommended methods for ALT and AST are used by one-third of laboratories and give significantly higher results than non-IFCC methods. Laboratories using IFCC methods also reported significantly higher FIB-4 scores. Reference ranges and cut-offs for these tests also varied, and did not account for method-related differences in results.
Conclusions: The lack of standardization of LFTs can have a significant impact on patient care. The difference in results for ALT, AST and FIB-4 in laboratories not using IFCC-recommended methods may lead to misdiagnosis. This issue should be addressed by laboratories using methods including pyridoxal-5-phosphate. Until then, method-related reference ranges and cut-offs for ALT, AST and FIB-4 are required.
期刊介绍:
Annals of Clinical Biochemistry is the fully peer reviewed international journal of the Association for Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine.
Annals of Clinical Biochemistry accepts papers that contribute to knowledge in all fields of laboratory medicine, especially those pertaining to the understanding, diagnosis and treatment of human disease. It publishes papers on clinical biochemistry, clinical audit, metabolic medicine, immunology, genetics, biotechnology, haematology, microbiology, computing and management where they have both biochemical and clinical relevance. Papers describing evaluation or implementation of commercial reagent kits or the performance of new analysers require substantial original information. Unless of exceptional interest and novelty, studies dealing with the redox status in various diseases are not generally considered within the journal''s scope. Studies documenting the association of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with particular phenotypes will not normally be considered, given the greater strength of genome wide association studies (GWAS). Research undertaken in non-human animals will not be considered for publication in the Annals.
Annals of Clinical Biochemistry is also the official journal of NVKC (de Nederlandse Vereniging voor Klinische Chemie) and JSCC (Japan Society of Clinical Chemistry).