Analytical evaluation of eight qualitative FIT for haemoglobin products, for professional use in the UK.

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-09 DOI:10.1515/cclm-2024-0502
Carolyn Piggott, Cerin John, Shane O'Driscoll, Sally C Benton
{"title":"Analytical evaluation of eight qualitative FIT for haemoglobin products, for professional use in the UK.","authors":"Carolyn Piggott, Cerin John, Shane O'Driscoll, Sally C Benton","doi":"10.1515/cclm-2024-0502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Qualitative faecal immunochemical tests for haemoglobin (FIT), for triaging for colorectal cancer investigations, are available for professional use. The aim was to evaluate these lateral flow tests. No previous analytical evaluations have been published.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Analytical sensitivity (AS) was assessed using samples spanning manufacturers' quoted AS, concurrently with the quantitative OC-SENSOR PLEDIA, using Hb-spiked samples in manufacturers' buffer (n≥5; ≤9-99 ng Hb/mL buffer), Hb-spiked faeces (n=6; <2-34 µg Hb/g faeces) and natural faeces (n=17; <2-82 μg/g); concentrations for 50 %/100 % Hb-detected were compared with quoted AS. Compatibility with two external quality assessment schemes (EQAS) (n=9; 3-96 μg/g) and prozone compared with manufacturers limits (n=9; 2,500-10,000,000 ng/mL) were tested. Ease-of-use by five healthcare personnel was assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven products showed lower AS (ng/mL) than manufacturers quoted using Hb-spiked aqueous samples compared with OC-SENSOR, one was equivocal; six manufacturers quoted AS in µg/g, five showed lower AS using Hb-spiked faeces. Results were similar but less consistent for natural faeces. Result lines for low concentrations can be faint and open to interpretation. Results were consistent with manufacturers quoted prozone limits. Results were consistent for seven products for two EQAS. The ease-of-use was 68.5-85.6 %; products with lower scores could be improved with better instructions and sample bottles.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AS was lower for seven products (aqueous samples) and five products (aqueous/faecal samples) and prozone consistent with manufacturers expected concentrations, compared with OC-SENSOR. EQAS results were mostly consistent with expected results; products can be used by healthcare professionals, though some manufacturer improvements could be made.</p>","PeriodicalId":10390,"journal":{"name":"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2024-0502","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Qualitative faecal immunochemical tests for haemoglobin (FIT), for triaging for colorectal cancer investigations, are available for professional use. The aim was to evaluate these lateral flow tests. No previous analytical evaluations have been published.

Methods: Analytical sensitivity (AS) was assessed using samples spanning manufacturers' quoted AS, concurrently with the quantitative OC-SENSOR PLEDIA, using Hb-spiked samples in manufacturers' buffer (n≥5; ≤9-99 ng Hb/mL buffer), Hb-spiked faeces (n=6; <2-34 µg Hb/g faeces) and natural faeces (n=17; <2-82 μg/g); concentrations for 50 %/100 % Hb-detected were compared with quoted AS. Compatibility with two external quality assessment schemes (EQAS) (n=9; 3-96 μg/g) and prozone compared with manufacturers limits (n=9; 2,500-10,000,000 ng/mL) were tested. Ease-of-use by five healthcare personnel was assessed.

Results: Seven products showed lower AS (ng/mL) than manufacturers quoted using Hb-spiked aqueous samples compared with OC-SENSOR, one was equivocal; six manufacturers quoted AS in µg/g, five showed lower AS using Hb-spiked faeces. Results were similar but less consistent for natural faeces. Result lines for low concentrations can be faint and open to interpretation. Results were consistent with manufacturers quoted prozone limits. Results were consistent for seven products for two EQAS. The ease-of-use was 68.5-85.6 %; products with lower scores could be improved with better instructions and sample bottles.

Conclusions: AS was lower for seven products (aqueous samples) and five products (aqueous/faecal samples) and prozone consistent with manufacturers expected concentrations, compared with OC-SENSOR. EQAS results were mostly consistent with expected results; products can be used by healthcare professionals, though some manufacturer improvements could be made.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对英国专业用血红蛋白产品的八种定性 FIT 进行分析评估。
目的:粪便血红蛋白免疫化学定性检测(FIT)可用于结直肠癌检查的分流。目的是对这些侧流试验进行评估。方法:对分析灵敏度(AS)进行评估:分析灵敏度(AS)的评估使用的样本跨越了制造商所标注的 AS,同时使用定量 OC-SENSOR PLEDIA,使用制造商缓冲液中的 Hb 加标样本(n≥5;≤9-99 ng Hb/mL 缓冲液)、Hb 加标粪便(n=6;结果:与 OC-SENSOR 相比,七种产品在使用添加 Hb 的水样时显示的 AS(纳克/毫升)低于制造商的报价,一种产品的 AS 含量不明确;六种产品的 AS 含量以微克/克为单位,五种产品在使用添加 Hb 的粪便时显示的 AS 含量较低。天然粪便的结果类似,但不太一致。低浓度的结果线可能比较模糊,有待解释。结果与制造商引用的原区限值一致。两种 EQAS 的七种产品结果一致。易用性为 68.5-85.6%;得分较低的产品可通过更好的说明和样品瓶加以改进:与 OC-SENSOR 相比,7 种产品(水样)和 5 种产品(水样/粪便样)的 AS 值较低,prozone 符合制造商的预期浓度。EQAS 结果与预期结果基本一致;尽管生产商还可以做出一些改进,但医疗保健专业人员可以使用这些产品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine
Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
16.20%
发文量
306
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) publishes articles on novel teaching and training methods applicable to laboratory medicine. CCLM welcomes contributions on the progress in fundamental and applied research and cutting-edge clinical laboratory medicine. It is one of the leading journals in the field, with an impact factor over 3. CCLM is issued monthly, and it is published in print and electronically. CCLM is the official journal of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) and publishes regularly EFLM recommendations and news. CCLM is the official journal of the National Societies from Austria (ÖGLMKC); Belgium (RBSLM); Germany (DGKL); Hungary (MLDT); Ireland (ACBI); Italy (SIBioC); Portugal (SPML); and Slovenia (SZKK); and it is affiliated to AACB (Australia) and SFBC (France). Topics: - clinical biochemistry - clinical genomics and molecular biology - clinical haematology and coagulation - clinical immunology and autoimmunity - clinical microbiology - drug monitoring and analysis - evaluation of diagnostic biomarkers - disease-oriented topics (cardiovascular disease, cancer diagnostics, diabetes) - new reagents, instrumentation and technologies - new methodologies - reference materials and methods - reference values and decision limits - quality and safety in laboratory medicine - translational laboratory medicine - clinical metrology Follow @cclm_degruyter on Twitter!
期刊最新文献
CD34+ progenitor cells meet metrology. Expanded carrier screening for 224 monogenic disease genes in 1,499 Chinese couples: a single-center study. Allowable total error in CD34 cell analysis by flow cytometry based on state of the art using Spanish EQAS data. Comparison of capillary finger stick and venous blood sampling for 34 routine chemistry analytes: potential for in the hospital and remote blood sampling. Diagnostic performances and cut-off verification of blood pTau 217 on the Lumipulse platform for amyloid deposition in Alzheimer's disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1