Critical reviews in clinical laboratory sciences最新文献

The urocortins are polypeptides belonging to the corticotropin-releasing hormone family, known to modulate stress responses in mammals. Stress, whether induced physically or psychologically, is an underlying cause or consequence of numerous clinical syndromes. Identifying biological markers associated with the homeostatic regulation of stress could provide a clinical laboratory approach for the management of stress-related disorders. The neuropeptide, urocortin 3 (UCN3), and the corticotropin-releasing hormone receptor 2 (CRHR2) constitute a regulatory axis known to mediate stress homeostasis. Dysregulation of this peptide/receptor axis is believed to play a role in several clinical conditions including post-traumatic stress, sleep apnea, cardiovascular disease, and other health problems related to stress. Understanding the physiology and measurement of the UCN3/CRHR2 axis is important for establishing a viable clinical laboratory diagnostic. In this article, we focus on evidence supporting the role of UCN3 and its receptor in stress-related clinical syndromes. We also provide insight into the measurements of UCN3 in blood and urine. These potential biomarkers provide new opportunities for clinical research and applications of laboratory medicine diagnostics in stress management.

A plethora of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) diagnostic tests are available, each with different performance specifications, detection methods, and targets. This narrative review aims to summarize the diagnostic technologies available and how they are best selected to tackle SARS-CoV-2 infection as the pandemic evolves. Seven key settings have been identified where diagnostic tests are being deployed: symptomatic individuals presenting for diagnostic testing and/or treatment of COVID-19 symptoms; asymptomatic individuals accessing healthcare for planned non-COVID-19-related reasons; patients needing to access emergency care (symptom status unknown); patients being discharged from healthcare following hospitalization for COVID-19; healthy individuals in both single event settings (e.g. airports, restaurants, hotels, concerts, and sporting events) and repeat access settings (e.g. workplaces, schools, and universities); and vaccinated individuals. While molecular diagnostics remain central to SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies, we have offered some discussion on the considerations for when other tools and technologies may be useful, when centralized/point-of-care testing is appropriate, and how the various additional diagnostics can be deployed in differently resourced settings. As the pandemic evolves, molecular testing remains important for definitive diagnosis, but increasingly widespread point-of-care testing is essential to the re-opening of society.

Thyroid hormones are primarily responsible for regulating the basal metabolic rate but also make important contributions to reproductive function and fetal development. Both hyper- and hypothyroidism in pregnancy have been associated with increased risks of complications that include preeclampsia and low birth weight, among others. Furthermore, thyroid hormone deficiency in the developing fetus results in neurodevelopmental delay. As the fetus is exclusively reliant on maternal thyroid hormone for most of the first trimester and requires continued maternal supply until birth, identifying maternal thyroid dysfunction is critically important. However, evaluating thyroid function in pregnancy is challenging because of the many physiological changes that affect concentrations of thyroid-related analytes. Increasing plasma human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) concentrations in the second half of the first trimester elicit a corresponding transient decrease in thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), and continually increasing estradiol concentrations throughout pregnancy cause substantial increases in thyroxine-binding globulin (TBG) and total thyroxine (T4) relative to the nonpregnant state. Lastly, free T4 concentrations gradually decrease with increasing gestational age. For these reasons, it is essential to interpret thyroid function test results in the context of trimester-specific reference intervals to avoid misclassification of thyroid status. This review summarizes the effects of thyroid dysfunction prior to conception and during pregnancy and describes considerations for the laboratory assessment of thyroid function in pregnant women.

Inflammation is an enabling characteristic of the hallmarks of cancer. There has therefore been increasing interest in the clinical value of circulating inflammatory biomarkers in cancer. In this review, we summarize results on C-reactive protein (CRP), alone or as part of the Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS, composed of CRP and serum albumin), as a biomarker of prognosis or prediction and monitoring of therapeutic response in patients with breast cancer. A systematic literature search was performed in Medline and Embase from 1990 to August 2021. The association of serum CRP and overall survival and disease/progression-free survival was summarized in meta-analyses using a random effects model. The results from a total of 35 included studies (20,936 patients) were divided according to three identified patient settings (metastatic, non-metastatic, and general setting). Most of the studies examined prognostic utility. Several larger studies observed associations between high serum CRP and poor survival, but the meta-analyses suggested a limited value in a non-metastatic and general breast cancer setting (populations with unknown or varied disease stage). In metastatic patients, however, more consistent findings supported an association between serum CRP and prognosis (hazard ratio for overall survival: 1.87 (95% CI 1.31-2.67). Only five studies examined a role in prediction or monitoring of therapeutic response. One study reported a significant association between serum CRP levels and response to chemotherapy. Findings regarding serum CRP as a biomarker in breast cancer appear inconsistent, particularly in non-metastatic and general breast cancer, where the prognostic value could not be confirmed. In patients with metastatic breast cancer we suggest that high serum CRP is an indicator of poor prognosis. Too few studies assessed the role of serum CRP in prediction or monitoring of treatment response to allow conclusions.

Using laboratory test results for diagnosis and monitoring requires a reliable reference to which the results can be compared. Currently, most reference data is derived from the population, and patients in this context are considered members of a population group rather than individuals. However, such reference data has limitations when used as the reference for an individual. A patient's test results preferably should be compared with their own, individualized reference intervals (RI), i.e. a personalized RI (prRI).The prRI is based on the homeostatic model and can be calculated using an individual's previous test results obtained in a steady-state situation and estimates of analytical (CV_A) and biological variation (BV). BV used to calculate the prRI can be obtained from the population (within-subject biological variation, CV_I) or an individual's own data (within-person biological variation, CV_P). Statistically, the prediction interval provides a useful tool to calculate the interval (i.e. prRI) for future observation based on previous measurements. With the development of information technology, the data of millions of patients is stored and processed in medical laboratories, allowing the implementation of personalized laboratory medicine. PrRI for each individual should be made available as part of the laboratory information system and should be continually updated as new test results become available.In this review, we summarize the limitations of population-based RI for the diagnosis and monitoring of disease, provide an outline of the prRI concept and different approaches to its determination, including statistical considerations for deriving prRI, and discuss aspects which must be further investigated prior to implementation of prRI in clinical practice.

Neonatal jaundice is one of the most common clinical conditions affecting newborns. For most newborns, jaundice is harmless, however, a proportion of newborns develops severe neonatal jaundice requiring therapeutic interventions, accentuating the need to have reliable and accurate screening tools for timely recognition across different health settings. The gold standard method in diagnosing jaundice involves a blood test and requires specialized hospital-based laboratory instruments. Despite technological advancements in point-of-care laboratory medicine, there is limited accessibility of the specialized devices and sample stability in geographically remote areas. Lack of suitable testing options leads to delays in timely diagnosis and treatment of clinically significant jaundice in developed and developing countries alike. There has been an ever-increasing need for a low-cost, simple to use screening technology to improve timely diagnosis and management of neonatal jaundice. Consequently, several point-of-care (POC) devices have been developed to address this concern. This paper aims to review the literature, focusing on emerging technologies in the screening and diagnosing of neonatal jaundice. We report on the challenges associated with the existing screening tools, followed by an overview of emerging sensors currently in pre-clinical development and the emerging POC devices in clinical trials to advance the screening of neonatal jaundice. The benefits offered by emerging POC devices include their ease of use, low cost, and the accessibility of rapid response test results. However, further clinical trials are required to overcome the current limitations of the emerging POC's before their implementation in clinical settings. Hence, the need for a simple to use, low-cost POC jaundice detection technology for newborns remains an unsolved challenge globally.

Human breath offers several benefits for diagnostic applications, including simple, noninvasive collection. Breath is a rich source of clinically-relevant biological information; this includes a volatile fraction, where greater than 1,000 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have been described so far, and breath aerosols that carry nucleic acids, proteins, signaling molecules, and pathogens. Many of these factors, especially VOCs, are delivered to the lung by the systemic circulation, and diffusion of candidate biomarkers from blood into breath allows systematic profiling of organismal health. Biomarkers on breath offer the capability to advance early detection and precision medicine in areas of global clinical need. Breath tests are noninvasive and can be performed at home or in a primary care setting, which makes them well-suited for the kind of public screening program that could dramatically improve the early detection of conditions such as lung cancer. Since measurements of VOCs on breath largely report on metabolic changes, this too aids in the early detection of a broader range of illnesses and can be used to detect metabolic shifts that could be targeted through precision medicine. Furthermore, the ability to perform frequent sampling has envisioned applications in monitoring treatment responses. Breath has been investigated in respiratory, liver, gut, and neurological diseases and in contexts as diverse as infectious diseases and cancer. Preclinical research studies using breath have been ongoing for some time, yet only a few breath-based diagnostics tests are currently available and in widespread clinical use. Most recently, tests assessing the gut microbiome using hydrogen and methane on breath, in addition to tests using urea to detect Helicobacter pylori infections have been released, yet there are many more applications of breath tests still to be realized. Here, we discuss the strengths of breath as a clinical sampling matrix and the technical challenges to be addressed in developing it for clinical use. Historically, a lack of standardized methodologies has delayed the discovery and validation of biomarker candidates, resulting in a proliferation of early-stage pilot studies. We will explore how advancements in breath collection and analysis are in the process of driving renewed progress in the field, particularly in the context of gastrointestinal and chronic liver disease. Finally, we will provide a forward-looking outlook for developing the next generation of clinically relevant breath tests and how they may emerge into clinical practice.

Traditionally, diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer (PCa) have been based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, digital rectal examination (DRE), and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy. Biomarkers have been introduced into clinical practice to reduce the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of low-grade PCa and increase the success of personalized therapies for high-grade and high-stage PCa. The purpose of this review was to describe available PCa biomarkers and examine their use in clinical practice. A nonsystematic literature review was performed using PubMed and Scopus to retrieve papers related to PCa biomarkers. In addition, we manually searched websites of major urological associations for PCa guidelines to evaluate available evidence and recommendations on the role of biomarkers and their potential contribution to PCa decision-making. In addition to PSA and its derivates, thirteen blood, urine, and tissue biomarkers are mentioned in various PCa guidelines. Retrospective studies have shown their utility in three main clinical scenarios: (1) deciding whether to perform a biopsy, (2) distinguishing patients who require active treatment from those who can benefit from active surveillance, and (3) defining a subset of high-risk PCa patients who can benefit from additional therapies after RP. Several validated PCa biomarkers have become commercially available in recent years. Guidelines now recommend offering these tests in situations in which the assay result, when considered in combination with routine clinical factors, is likely to affect management. However, the lack of direct comparisons and the unproven benefits, in terms of long-term survival and cost-effectiveness, prevent these biomarkers from being integrated into routine clinical use.

Since 1999, the opioid epidemic in North America has resulted in over 1 million deaths, and it continues to escalate despite numerous efforts in various arenas to combat the upward trend. Clinical laboratories provide drug testing to support practices such as emergency medicine, substance use disorder treatment, and pain management; increasingly, these laboratories are collaborating in novel partnerships including drug-checking services (DCS) and multidisciplinary treatment teams. This review examines drug testing related to management of licit and illicit opioid use, new technologies and test strategies employed by clinical laboratories, barriers hindering laboratory response to the opioid epidemic, and areas for improvement and standardization within drug testing. Literature search terms included combinations of "opioid," "opiate," "fentanyl," "laboratory," "epidemic," "crisis," "mass spectrometry," "immunoassay," "drug screen," "drug test," "guidelines," plus review of PubMed "similar articles" and references within publications. While immunoassay (IA) and point-of-care (POC) test options for synthetic opioids are increasingly available, mass spectrometry (MS) platforms offer the greatest flexibility and sensitivity for detecting novel, potent opioids. Previously reserved as a second-tier application in most drug test algorithms, MS assays are gaining a larger role in initial screening for specific patients and DCS. However, there are substantial differences among laboratories in terms of updating test menus, algorithms, and technologies to meet changing clinical needs. While some clinical laboratories lack the resources and expertise to implement MS, many are also slow to adopt available IA and POC tests for newer opioids such as fentanyl. MS-based testing also presents challenges, including gaps in available guidance for assay validation and ongoing performance assessment that contribute to a dramatic lack of standardization among laboratories. We identify opportunities for improvement in laboratory operations, reporting, and interpretation of drug test results, including laboratorian and provider education and laboratory-focused guidelines. We also highlight the need for collaboration with providers, assay and instrument manufacturers, and national organizations to increase the effectiveness of clinical laboratory and provider efforts in preventing morbidity and mortality associated with opioid use and misuse.

Preterm labor (PTL) is a severe issue of neonatal healthcare because its related to preterm birth (PTB) is the leading cause of neonatal mortality and the most common reason for antenatal hospitalizations. The PTB rate is about 11% globally and it is similar in the United States. PTB poses a significant economic burden on the healthcare system. Early diagnosis of PTL is the key to reducing PTB rate, neonatal mortality, and long-term neurological impairment in children. The diagnosis of PTL is usually based on clinical criteria, but the accuracy of the diagnosis is poor. To predict the risk of PTL more accurately, tests of biomarkers with variable clinical diagnostic performances have been developed and some of them have been applied clinically. In this article, we analyze the performance characteristics of these biomarkers, such as sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value, as well as the clinical utility of current biomarkers so that clinical laboratorians and clinicians can better understand the limitations of these tests and utilize them wisely. We also summarize the current recommendations on clinical utilization of PTL biomarkers. Finally, we explore the prospects of future omics-based novel biomarkers, which may improve prediction of PTL in the future.