The comparability of alpha-fetoprotein detection results and analysis of external quality assessment results
10.3760/cma.j.cn114452-20240723-00397
- VernacularTitle:甲胎蛋白检测结果的可比性研究和室间质量评价结果分析
- Author:
Wenxuan FU
1
;
Shunli ZHANG
;
Jing ZHAO
;
Xu SI
;
Yuhong YUE
;
Rui ZHANG
Author Information
1. 首都医科大学附属北京朝阳医院检验科，北京 100020
- Keywords:
alpha-fetoprotein;
Quality control;
Reference standards
- From:
Chinese Journal of Laboratory Medicine
2024;47(9):1034-1041
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To evaluate the current status of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) detection, a comparability analysis was conducted on the results measured by eight automated immunoassay systems, incorporating external quality assessment (EQA) data from the Beijing Center for Clinical Laboratories (BCCL) for the years 2020, 2021, and 2023.Methods:Methodological evaluation. Abbott Architect i2000, Beckman DxI 800, Roche Cobas E601, Diasorin Liaison XL, Maccura IS1200, Autolumo A2000, Leadman CI1000, and Mindray CL-2000i were used to detect 40 individual AFP serum samples that were collected from the laboratory of Beijing Chaoyang Hospital in 2019. The AFP results from eight different systems were compared with the median cohort. Passing-Bablok regression was used to evaluate the correlation between methods, and the concordance correlation coefficient was used to analyse the consistency between methods. Taking the optimal biological variability (±5.90%) as the criterion for bias evaluation, the bias between systems was evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis. The EQA results for AFP from BCCL over the past three years were statistically analysed to calculate the robust mean, robust coefficient of variation ( CV), and standard uncertainty within groups. The acceptance limit is based on the requirement of desirable biological variability (±21.87%) of allowable total error, and the pass rates were calculated for instrument or method groups, respectively. Results:The CVs of the eight detection systems were all≤1/3 allowable total error (±8.3%), passing the precision verification. The average relative biases between two detection systems (Roche Cobas E601 and Maccura IS1200) and the median cohort were>±5.90%, while the other six detection systems were<±5.90%. The eight detection systems showed good correlation and consistency with the median cohort (both R2 and concordance correlation coefficients>0.95). The results of EQA showed that there were no statistically significant differences in the robust means within each instrument or method group ( P>0.05). In the instrument group, except for Siemens and two other groups, the robust CVs of other groups were within 9%. The pass rates of most instruments and methods after being grouped were higher than the total pass rate, but that of the enzyme immunoassay chemiluminescence method was relatively low. Conclusions:The eight automated AFP immunoassay systems show a good correlation with the median cohort, and the consistency of AFP detection results is satisfactory among most detection systems. However, the comparability of AFP detection results for certain systems needs further improvement.
