Presentation on theme: "Verification of Performance Specifications"— Presentation transcript:
1Verification of Performance Specifications An Advanced View of Method ValidationVersion 5.0, August 2012Additional materials supplied for Advanced Assay Validation modules
2Objectives Identify test classifications Define what each validation experiment details for testing methodsDiscuss what is recommended to perform each of the validation experiments for testing methodsRecognize how to evaluate data obtained from each of the validation experiments
3Pre-Assessment Question #1 A rapid Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) test would likely be classified as a:High complexity, modified assayModerate complexity, unmodified assayFood and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved, modified assayWaived, FDA-approved, unmodified assayRemember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: D. “Waived, FDA-approved, unmodified assay”
4Pre-Assessment Question #2 The precision of a test method gives information related to the method’s:Systematic errorComparison of results to a reference methodReproducibilityLikelihood of being affected by hemolysis, lipemia and icterusBoth A and BRemember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: C. “Reproducibility”
5Pre-Assessment Question #3 When transferring reference intervals of 20 specimens used, what is the minimum number that must fall within manufacturer’s reference intervals?20181615Remember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: B. “18”
6Pre-Assessment Question #4 Which linear regression equation component gives information regarding constant bias?yxm (slope)b (intercept)Remember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: D. “b (intercept)”
7Selecting a Method Evaluate diagnostic tests Characteristics of testing methodsReferences: Technical literature and manufacturer’s informationSelect method of analysisValidate method performanceImplement methodPerform tests with appropriate Quality Control (QC) and External Quality Assurance (EQA)Characteristics of testing methodsApplications: Types of specimens, sample volume recommended, time of performance, work, space recommended, etc.Methodology: Sensitivity and specificity, reportable range, etc.A number of factors are involved in the selection of methods and equipment required for testing (cost, space, access to local equipment support, etc.)Important to review analyzers offered by different companies – do they meet the needs of your lab?Need to validate the assay before you begin to use it to report patient test results.Need to verify manufacturers claims; validate performance method
8Method Validation What is method validation? Why must we validate? When should we validate?What is Method Validation?Method validation and/or verification is the process by which a method is determined to be fit for purpose and intended use. Although method validation/verification are often used interchangeably, validation is usually performed on in-house and/or modified methods, while verification is taking a marketed/unmodified assay and verifying its performance.Why is it important?Different testing environment, need to demonstrate that the test method performs in your lab environment as the manufacturer states it shouldNeed to prove to yourself that the results reported by the manufacturer are reliable.When?Initially, before releasing patient results, and after any manufacturer changes/modifications and/or movement of the equipment.What should we validate?
9Method Validation (cont’d) Why is validation important?Division of Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (DAIDS) requirementHow important is it that the results produced by the testing method are reliable?Shouldn’t the laboratory know the level of performance of an adopted test method?Validation is an FDA requirement under Investigational New Drug (IND).
10Tests to Validate Waived Non-waived Unmodified FDA-approved Waived tests are approved by the FDA for home use and by definition are simple to perform (i.e., pregnancy test) – do not require validation.Non-waived tests included moderately and highly complex tests [DEFINE] – requires validationDegree of validation/verification depends on status of the test method (FDA-approved/Non-FDA-approved/Modified/Unmodified)Unmodified FDA-approved: using as intended by the manufacturer and licensed for use by the FDAModified or Non-FDA approved: using test kit for indications other than as intended by the manufacturer; not licensed for use by the FDA.Unmodified FDA-approvedModified and/or Non-FDA-approved
11FDA Approval Resources VendorPublicationsProcedures/InVitroDiagnostics/LabTest/ucm htmSources for information regarding FDA approval status.
12Skill CheckWhat would you consider to be the complexity, per Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA), of the glucose assay in the workbook?WaivedModerateHighRemember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: B. “Moderate”Moderate: No special pre-treatment steps recommended, performed on analyzer, very little or no interpretation required.
13Skill CheckWhat would you consider to be the complexity of a rapid urine pregnancy assay?WaivedModerateHighRemember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: A. “Waived”Waived: Simple to perform, very little chance of error, can be performed outside of the lab by non-clinical personnel.
14Skill CheckWhat would you consider to be the complexity of performing a manual white cell differential using a stained whole blood smear?WaivedModerateHighRemember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: C. “High”High Complexity: Some degree of specimen preparation/pretreatment, interpretation/identification required.
15Method Validation Before you begin: Be sure you are familiar with the test method before startingKnow what to expect from the method (package insert, discussions with technical assistance, and field service representatives)Do not include results outside of stated reportable rangesPredict your findings; establish limits/evaluation criteria
16Central Tendency Dispersion Terms for Discussion Central Tendency – describes the way in which quantitative data tend to cluster around some value; If you run specimens again and again, results have a tendency to go to an average (mean)Dispersion – spread of results
17Terms for Discussion (cont’d) ValuesAll results, even if they don’t look good.Run17
18Error in Test Methods Some error is expected Examples Error must be managedUnderstandingDefining specifications of allowable errorMeasurementSome error is expected; but need to manage error in order to report accurate results.All methods have some level of systematic and random error.The purpose of method validation is error assessment (i.e. random, systematic and total analytical errors)During method validation a series of experiments are performed to estimate certain types of analytical errors:Linearity experiments determine reportable rangeReplication experiments estimate precision or random errorComparison of methods experiments estimate accuracy or systematic errorInterference experiments estimate constant and proportional systematic errors ( or analytical specificity)Detection limit experiments characterize analytical sensitivity.We will review all of these concepts shortly.
19Total Error of Testing System Total Allowable ErrorCLIA Guidelines per analyteOther GuidelinesSystematic ErrorRandom ErrorTotal ErrorTotal Allowable Error: For a given test or assay, what we should expect to see when you combine systematic and random error.CLIA guidelines have several indicators that can be used to help you determine your Total Allowable Error for a given test/assay.
20Error Assessment Random Error (RE) Systematic Error (SE) Total Error In one direction, cause results to be high or lowIn either direction, unpredictableCombined effectHere we discuss the idea that Systematic + Random error = total error, and has the potential to push the result we get that distance from the actual true result. We can draw a picture to represent this.Systematic Error: Tends towards or direction (either +/- from true value); size is stable and consistent; appears every time you perform the test.Random Error: By nature is random; tends towards either direction (can add to or deduct from the true value); size is unpredictable. Average amount of random error occurs sporadically; each specimen going through the test will be affected to varying degrees.CLIA guidelines available for estimation of Total Error; may not always be available for your particular assay.David Rhodes – the most we should ever allow for Total Error is 30%.
21Total Error Considerations Low End Performance StandardsRecommendations derived from upper portion of reportable range are more difficult to achieve at lower concentrationsMaximum Total Error AllowedConsidered to be 30% by David Rhoads, except for amplification methods
22Systematic and Random Errors Systematic ErrorSlope/Proportional errorIntercept/Constant errorBiasRandom ErrorMeanStandard deviation (SD)Coefficient of variation (CV)Systematic error is represented in terms of…Random error is represented in terms of…
23Tools for Use Data-Crunching Tools Statistical calculators, graph paperSpreadsheets with calculationsHere is where we describe and/or demonstrate tools that we have.We can use the spreadsheets from the standards at this point…Or just free wheel it.Need some data crunching tools at your disposal (i.e., Excel)Validation software can be purchased (i.e., EP Evaluation, Analyze IT, etc.)Westgard has free tools available for use online (www.westgaurd.com)Validation Software (Westgard, Analyze-It, EP Evaluator)
24How We Will Work Through This Module One quantitative test taken through the validation processOne qualitative method taken through the validation process
25Elements of Validation Reportable RangePrecisionAccuracyElements of ValidationReference IntervalsSensitivityThe 6 Elements of Method Validation:If FDA-approved/Unmodified – only Reportable Range, Precision, Accuracy and Reference Intervals need to be verified.If Non-FDA approved/Modified – all 6 elements must be performed, including sensitivity and specificity.Correction Factors:Correction factors, if used, must be incorporated into the relevant test procedure and reflected in the appropriate Standard Operating Procedure (SOP).Correction factors represent adjustments made to compensate for constant and proportional error (or bias).Specificity
26How we perform the testing PrecisionDefinition: ReproducibilityGives information related to random errorIntroduction20 samples of same material (typically two levels; e.g., Glucose at 50 and 300 mg/dL)Standard solutionsControl materialsPools (short term only)What is neededMeasure of the reproducibility of the assay.Provides information related to random error.How do you verify precision?Must repeat testing on 20 samples over one day (short term) and over a period of 20 days (long term).Within 20 days we hope to see good among of variation in terms of how the test performed and exposure to a variety of environmental conditions.Repeat testing over short and long term (one day and 20 days, respectively)How we perform the testing
27Precision: How We Evaluate the Data Calculate the following:MeanStandard deviation (SD)Coefficient of Variation (CV)What amount of random error is allowable, based on CLIA criteria?Short term: 0.25 of allowable total errorLong term: 0.33 of allowable total errorFirst step, calculate mean, SD (standard deviation), and CVCV = SD/Mean x 100% “the great leveler”Compare information to manufacturers package insert, ORCompare to CLIA recommendations for allowable random error:CLIA criteria for allowable random error: no more than 25% for short term, or 33% for long term
28Allowable Total Error Database Link for:Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)College of American Pathologists (CAP)Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia (RCPA)Others
29Precision: Levey-Jennings (LJ) Charts ValuesAll results, even if they don’t look good.Run29
30Precision: How We Evaluate the Data How do we compare to manufacturer’s data?MeanSDCV: More commonly used, allows for easier comparisonCompare results to manufacturers data first, if comparable to manufacturers data you can indicate that the method is acceptable from a precision standard and move forward.If not, then compare to CLIA.
31Precision Example Mean of Level 1 Glucose 90 mg/dL CLIA Total Allowable Error6 mg/dL or ± 10%Total Allowable Error Level 1 Glucose0.1 x 90 = 9 mg/dLRandom error allowed:0.25 x total allowable0.33 x total allowableAs an example….Calculated mean is 90 mg/mLPer CLIA – 25% of mean is attributed to random error for Short Term (2.25 mg/dL); 33% for Long Term (2.97 mg/dL)Compare CLIA calculations for short and long term? Do results make sense? Yes, would expect more random error over the long term.Short-term precisionLong-term precision0.25 x 9 mg/dL0.33 x 9 mg/dL2.25 mg/dL2.97 mg/dL
32Activity Work with Levey-Jennings graph and data Work with mean and standard deviation to calculate a coefficient of variation, as well as a mean and a coefficient of variation to calculate a standard deviationDetermine if precision data is acceptable<Refer to supplemental materials provided for this section>Supplemental Materials Needed (Advanced Method Validation): Precision Data Sets Worksheet, Graph paper
33How we perform the testing AccuracyDefinition: How close to the true valueComparison of methodsGives information related to systematic errorPotential conflicts on interpretation of results (reference values)Introduction40 different specimensCover reportable range of methodQuality versus quantityWhat is neededHow does the new method compare to the reference method or standard?Testing should be performed in duplicate over at least 5 days in order to account for analyzer variations over the specified time period.Precision gives you information related to random error; Accuracy gives you information related to systematic error.Duplicate measurements of each specimen on each methodMinimum of five days, prefer over 20 (since replicate testing is same)How we perform the testing
34Accuracy: How We Evaluate the Data Graph the Data:Difference plotReal timeComparison plotCalculatey = mx + bTest method on Y-axisb represents constant errorReference (comparative) method on X-axism represents proportional errorCreate graph electronically or by hand on an x/y axis.Plot data, draw best fit line, calculate linear regression equation (y= mx +b).b= y intercept, m= slope, x=comparative/reference method.Best case scenario: Slope close to 1; Intercept close to 0 – would indicate that a result of 50 on current method is also 50 on comparative method.Difference plot, if one-to-one relationship expected.Shows analytical range of data, linearity of response over range and relationship between methods
35Visual Inspection for Accuracy (x1, y1)Test Method(x2, y2)Slope = (y2- y1) / (x2- x1)To evaluate accuracy, first run all of your samples on both the old instrument and the new instrument.<<<click>>>Next, plot the results you obtain. In this example the old instrument is along the X axis and the new instrument is along the Y axis.Plot all of the results from your run.Draw the “best fit” line.InterceptReference Method35
36Accuracy: How We Evaluate the Data Slope: Usually not significantly different from 1Intercept: Not significantly different from 0Significant difference with Medical Decision Points
37Calculate Appropriate Statistics SlopeMeasure of proportional biasm = (y1-y2)/(x1-x2) or “rise/run”Slope greater than 1 means the Y (Test) values are generally higher than the X (Comparative) valuesSlope of 1.11 means the Y (Test) values are on average 11% higher than the X (Comparative) valuesLinear regression programs or calculator will perform this calculation for you.Slope itself is a measure of proportional bias.If m>1, the higher the value of x; the more variation on y.If m>1, can assume y>x, i.e. test values for new method are generally higher than comparative method.If m>1.11, test values are 11% greater than comparative method.If m=0.95, test values are lower on average by 5%.
38Calculate Appropriate Statistics (cont'd) Intercept of the LineMeasure of constant bias between two methodsY (Test) value at the point where the line crosses the Y axisIf Y intercept is 12, then all Y (Test) values are at least 12 units higher than the X (Comparative) valuesAssuming slope = 1, if y= 12, the test values are at least 12 units higher.Assuming slope = 1, if y= -10, assume test values are 10 units lower than comparative method.
39What type of bias do you see? AccuracyWhat type of bias do you see?Answer on the next slide.
40Accuracy (cont’d) Constant Bias Proportional Bias Is this proportional or constant biasConstant Bias: y intercept has changedProportional Bias: Slope has changed
41Skill CheckCan a linear regression formula offer predictive value in relation to method comparisons?YesNoRemember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: A. “Yes”
42Activity Create graph based on sample set Determine slope from best-fit lineDetermine Y-intercept from best-fit lineExplain the relationship between comparative and test results<Refer to supplemental materials provided for this section>Supplemental Materials Needed (Advanced Method Validation): Comparison Data Set, Graph Paper
43Reportable Range / Linearity Definition: Lowest and highest test results that are reliableEspecially important with two point calibrationsAnalytical Measurement Range (AMR) and derived Clinical Reportable Range (CRR)IntroductionSeries of samples of known concentrations (e.g., standard solutions, EQA linearity sets)Series of known dilutions of highly elevated specimen or spiked specimens; EQA specimensAt least four levels (five preferred)What is neededLinearity may be misnomer; hence the terminology of Analytical Measurement Range and derived Clinical Reportable Range.How we perform the testingCLSI recommends four measurements of each specimen; three are sufficient
44Reportable Range: How We Evaluate the Data Plot mean values of:Measured values on Y-axis versusKnown or assigned values on X-axisVisually inspect, draw best-fit line, estimate reportable rangeCompare with expected values (typically provided by manufacturer)
45Reportable Range Activity AssignedValueExperimental ResultsAverageRep #1Rep #2Rep #3Rep #410.0____11.0100.099.0103.0101.0300.0303.0305.0304.0306.0500.0505.0506.0800.0740.0741.0744.0742.0
46Reportable Range Activity (cont'd) AssignedValueExperimental ResultsAverageRep #1Rep #2Rep #3Rep #410.010.511.0100.0101.599.0103.0101.0300.0304.5303.0305.0304.0306.0500.0505.5505.0506.0800.0741.8740.0741.0744.0742.0
47Reportable Range Activity (cont'd) Can everyone see the slight drop in linearity between 700 and 1,000?
48AMR vs. CRR Analytical Measurement Range (AMR) Linearity Clinically Reportable Range (CRR)Discussion of definitions:AMR: Straight linearity, minimum three (3) levels of known concentrationsCRR: DilutionsNOTE: Validation materials must span the range of the Analytical Measurement Range (AMR); the matrix of the materials should not interfere with the method or bias the results.Allows for dilution or other preparatory steps beyond routine
49Skill CheckIf you do not have enough specimen to perform a dilution, upon which reportable range component must you rely?AMRCRRNeither A or BBoth A and BRemember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: A. “AMR”
50Linearity MaterialsUtilizing the marketing materials from the two chemistry linearity kits in your handouts:Determine which kit would be more appropriate for use with the chemistry assay you chose earlierExplain your reasoning<Refer to supplemental materials provided for this section>Supplemental Materials Needed (Advanced Method Validation): NOVA-ONE Chemistry Reference Kits, Fisher Healthcare (Microgenics CASCO DOCUMENT CALVER)The first one is better…has an upper concentration of 750, more closely approximating the manufacturer’s linearity.
51Graph ActivityGiven your choice of linearity kits, you perform your AMR experiments by performing four replicates of each level of known concentration solution. The data you obtain is displayed on the next slide.Review data; record any initial observationsGraph data on supplied graph paperDetermine your assay’s AMR<Refer to supplemental materials provided for this section>Supplemental Materials Needed (Advanced Method Validation): Graph Paper
52Linearity Experiment Results LevelRep 1Rep 2Rep 3Rep 4124232521961971711943359360358361453053252953557006957027095 levels of known concentration linearity materials, run in duplicates of 4What is the next step? Evaluate data – are there any outliers? Yes (171)Statistically speaking you can only exclude one outlierExclude 171 and calculate the average
53ActivityUsing an Excel spreadsheet, create a graph and calculate linear regression statistics from the data providedTo what concentration have we proven linearity? (705 = AMR)
54Lab's Average Known Conc 195.7 200 375 550 725 Rep 1Rep 2Rep 3Rep 4Lab's AverageKnownConc242325196197171194195.7200359360358361375530532529535550700695702709725Exclude outlier (171) and calculate the average
56Dilution ProtocolsYour medical director, in consultation with clinicians, determines that for proper study participant care the Clinically Reportable Range (CRR) for glucose is 15 – 1400 mg/dLGiven your linearity experiment results and the package insert, devise a dilution protocol to be contained within our Glucose SOP<Refer to supplemental materials provided for this section>Supplemental Materials Needed (Advanced Method Validation): Glucose Package InsertIf analyzer creates results greater than 1400, report as >1400If less than 15, report as <15Dilution Protocol: What will you use as a diluent? Consult the manufacturers package insert for guidance (i.e., saline)Based on results, what is the maximum dilution we will ever perform?We have proven AMR up to 705, and the highest reportable value is 1400, so at most dilute to 2X [2 x 700 = 1,400]
57Reportable ResultsGiven your AMR, CRR, and dilution protocol, how would you handle the following analyzer results?12 mg/dL800 mg/dL1600 mg/dLUsing the previously calculated values for AMR and CRR, and the dilution protocol, discuss how you would handle the following analyzer results
58How we perform the testing Reference IntervalsDefinition: Normal range in healthy populationUsed for diagnosis/clinical interpretation of resultsIntroductionPre-defined “normal” criteria for screening purposesTransferring: 20 “normal” individuals’ specimensEstablishing: 120 “normal” individuals’ specimensWhat is neededFor each reagent or kit, need to establish reference intervals to assist clinicians in interpretation of results.Based on normal “healthy” population.Test and compare to manufacturer: If all 20 specimens fall within the specified range, the reference ranges have been verified and you can adopt manufacturer suggestions and incorporate into your SOP. If not, need to establish reference ranges for your population (240 specimens: 120 each of male and female).Another lab may have established reference ranges that can be used for verification purposes; must be documented.How we perform the testingPerform testing on all samplesDocument results
59Reference Intervals: How We Evaluate the Data TransferringEstablishing18 of 20 must fall within manufacturer’s rangesCalculate mean and SD of data for each groupReference Intervals = mean ± 2 SD (if Gaussian Distribution only, otherwise, additional calculations recommended)If 3 of 20 fail…must look at another group of 20 for a total 40; now 36 must fall within the reference range.
60ActivityDetermine if assay is eligible for transference of reference intervalsReview a sample set of data to determine if transference may be performed; if not, determine next step(s)<Refer to supplemental materials provided for this section>Supplemental Materials Needed (Advanced Method Validation): Normal Range Data, Glucose Package InsertAdult Glucose Result:Glucose manufacturer’s reference range (refer to package insert): mg/dLIs the assay eligible for transference of reference intervals? NO (3 fall out of manufacturers reference range; 107, 106 and 110)*Need to repeat with another 20, of which 36 of the 40 must fall within manufacturers expected range
61How we perform the testing SensitivityDefinition: Lowest reliable value; lower limit of detection, especially of interest in drug testing and tumor markersDifferent terminologies used by different manufacturersIntroductionBlank solutionsSpiked samplesWhat is neededNot required for FDA approved/ unmodified assay.If FDA approved/Unmodified, information can be used directly and incorporated in the your SOP.Need to adopt values in your SOP as evidence for sponsor/audit.How we perform the testing20 replicate measurements over short or long term, depending on focus
62Sensitivity: How We Evaluate the Data Three methods used:Lower Limit of Detection (LLD):Mean of the blank sample, plus two or three SD of blank sampleBiological Limit of Detection:LLD plus two or three times SD of spiked sample with concentration of detection limitFunctional Sensitivity:Mean concentration for spiked sample whose CV = 20%; lowest limit where quantitative data is reliable
63ActivityUsing the manufacturer’s package inserts, find the related information for sensitivity. How was it calculated?<Refer to supplemental materials provided for this section>Supplemental Materials Needed (Advanced Method Validation): Glucose Package InsertReferring to the package insert, determine what method was used to calculate sensitivity:Limit of Detection (LOD) = 2.5mg/mL Limit of Quantitation (LOQ) = 5.0mg/mLFDA approved/unmodified assay – can copy information directly into SOP and adopt values directly; do not need to validate
64How we perform the testing SpecificityDefinition: Determination of how well a method measures the analyte of interest accompanied by potential interfering materialsIntroductionStandard solutions, participant specimens or poolsInterferer solutions (standard solutions, if possible; otherwise, pools or specimens) added at high concentrationsWhat is neededAbility of your method to accurately measure an analyte within the presence of potential interfering substances.Not required for FDA approved/ unmodified assay.If FDA approved/Unmodified, adopt values in your SOP as evidence for sponsor/audit.How we perform the testingDuplicate measurements
65Specificity: How We Evaluate the Data Tabulate results for pairs of samples (dilution and interferent)Calculate means for each (dilution and interferent)Calculate the differencesCalculate the average interference of all specimens tested at a given concentration of interferenceWhat else can cause interferences? Drugs/medication/hemolysis/lipemia.Run assay with specimen diluted with blank (saline) and compare to same specimen diluted with potential interfering substance.
66Qualitative Assays Compare diagnosis Assume comparative (reference) method is accurateDetermine the following:True Positives, True negativesFalse Positives, False negativesCalculate sensitivity and specificity and compare to manufacturerUp until now, this module has spoken by and large to validation steps in relation to quantitative assays, or assays that generate a numeric result. What about qualitative assays, the tests that generate positive or negative, reactive or non-reactive type results? The steps recommended to validate these assays vary a bit in the respect that laboratories will compare “diagnoses” produced by the new testing method as compared to a current or reference method.The rule of thumb here is to assume the reference method (current method) is accurate, and if there is a discrepancy in the results; the new method’s result is the one in question. Given this convention, the laboratory can tally discrepant results into classifications of false positives or false negatives, as compared with the reference method. The results that compare across methods would be tallied as true positives or negatives. Given this data, the laboratory can calculate a comparative sensitivity and specificity, that allows evaluation of the new method based on published information from the new method’s manufacturer.66
67Qualitative Assays: Control of Validation Negative and Positive Quality ControlsUse QC materials recommended by manufacturer for verification purposesDetermine validity of other results, e.g., method comparisonsEvaluate failed runs if they occur during verification process
68Qualitative Methods: Precision How is it performed?Runs of specimens with analyte concentrations near the cutoff pointThree specimens, one at cutoff, one just below cutoff, and one just above cutoff (± 20% recommended)Replicate measurements of each of three specimens (20 each, minimum)How is it evaluated?Determine percentage of positives and negatives for each specimenEvaluate cutoff, as well as other two specimens
69Accuracy/Method Comparisons How is it performed?Specimens typical of population (to be tested in future use of method)50 positive specimens and 50 negative specimens recommended; minimum 20 eachPerformed over 10 to 20 daysHow is it evaluated?Discrepant results near cutoff?Most often sensitivity and specificity used to describe performance
70Comparative or Reference Method Result Positive Predictive Value Qualitative MethodsComparative or Reference Method ResultPositiveNegativeTest Method ResultTrue PositiveFalse PositivePositive Predictive ValueFalse NegativeTrue NegativeNegative PredictiveValueSensitivitySpecificityTrue vs. FalseFalse Positive Rate - False Positives divided by total number of NegativesFalse Negative Rate - False Negatives divided by total number of Positives
71Qualitative Methods (cont'd) Comparative or Reference Method ResultPositiveNegativeTest Method ResultTrue PositiveFalse PositivePositive Predictive ValueFalse NegativeTrue NegativeNegative PredictiveValueSensitivitySpecificitySensitivity = 100 x True Positives divided by (True Positives + False Negatives)Specificity = 100 x True Negatives divided by (True Negatives + False Positives)
72Qualitative Methods (cont'd) Comparative or Reference Method ResultPositiveNegativeTest Method ResultTrue PositiveFalse PositivePositive Predictive ValueFalse NegativeTrue NegativeNegative PredictiveValueSensitivitySpecificityPredictive Values - Operation of a test on a mixed population of Positive and NegativesA property of the test and the population; and affected by prevalence of PositivesPositive Predictive Value = True Positives divided by (True Positives + False Positives)Negative Predictive Value = True Negatives divided by (True Negatives + False Negatives)
73Evaluation Criteria High Diagnostic Value 100% Sensitivity 100% SpecificityWhat happens if True Positive rate is equal to the False Positive rate?Sensitivity = TP/(TP+FN) = must have zero false negatives (FN) to achieve 100%Specificity = TN/(TN+FP) = must have zero false positives (FP) to achieve 100%What happens if we have 50% sensitivity and 50% specificity? Would have equal values for TN and FP; and equal values for TP and FN – does that assay have real diagnostic value? NO
74ActivityEstimate sensitivity and specificity of a qualitative method given a data set.<Refer to supplemental materials provided for this section>Supplemental Materials Needed (Advanced Method Validation): Qualitative Method Comparison DataUse the data to tally the TP, FP, FN, TN; then calculate the sensitivity and specificity:[TP=8, FP=2, FN=1, TN=9]Sensitivity = TP/(TP+FN) = 89%Specificity = TN/(TN+FP) = 82%Is this acceptable performance for your lab? Methods vary in terms of specificity and sensitivity.
75Activity (cont’d)Create a validation plan for a quantitative assay to be performed in your laboratory.
76In ClosingNow that you have completed this module, you should be able to:Identify test classificationsDefine what each validation experiment details for testing methodsDiscuss what is recommended to perform each of the validation experiments for testing methodsRecognize how to evaluate data obtained from each of the validation experiments
77Post-Assessment Question #1 A rapid HIV test would likely be classified as a:High complexity, modified assayModerate complexity, unmodified assayFDA-approved, modified assayWaived, FDA-approved, unmodified assayRemember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: D. “Waived, FDA-approved, unmodified assay”
78Post-Assessment Question #2 The precision of a test method gives information related to the method’s:Systematic errorComparison of results to a reference methodReproducibilityLikelihood of being affected by hemolysis, lipemia and icterusBoth A and BRemember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: C. “Reproducibility”
79Post-Assessment Question #3 When transferring reference intervals of 20 specimens used, what is the minimum number that must fall within manufacturer’s reference intervals?20181615Remember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: B. “18”
80Post-Assessment Question #4 Which linear regression equation component gives information regarding constant bias?yxm (slope)b (intercept)Remember to pick the best answer.The correct answer is: D. “b (intercept)”
81References DAIDS Good Clinical Laboratory Practice (GCLP) Guidelines. Validation of Qualitative Methods.42 CFR §College of American Pathologists Commission on Laboratory Accreditation, Accreditation Checklists, April 2006.Westgard, James O. Basic Method Validation 2nd Edition. Madison, WI: Westgard QC, Inc., 2003.Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. User Protocol for Evaluation of Qualitative Test Performance; Approved Guideline. NCCLS document EP12-A. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA USA, 2002.Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Evaluation of Precision.Performance of Quantitative Measurement Methods. NCCLS document EP5-A2. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA USA, 2004.Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. User verification of Performance for Precision and Trueness. CLSI document EP15-A2. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA USA, 2005.