Flow Cytometric Analyses of Lymphocyte Markers in Immune Oncology: A Comprehensive Guidance for Validation Practice According to Laws and Standards

Many anticancer therapies such as antibody-based therapies, cellular therapeutics (e.g., genetically modified cells, regulators of cytokine signaling, and signal transduction), and other biologically tailored interventions strongly influence the immune system and require tools for research, diagnosis, and monitoring. In flow cytometry, in vitro diagnostic (IVD) test kits that have been compiled and validated by the manufacturer are not available for all requirements. Laboratories are therefore usually dependent onmodifying commercially available assays or, most often, developing them to meet clinical needs. However, both variants must then undergo full validation to fulfill the IVD regulatory requirements. Flow cytometric immunophenotyping is a multiparametric analysis of parameters, some of which have to be repeatedly adjusted; that must be considered when developing specific antibody panels. Careful adjustments of general rules are required to meet legal and regulatory requirements in the analysis of these assays. Here, we describe the relevant regulatory framework for flow cytometry-based assays and describe methods for the introduction of new antibody combinations into routine work including development of performance specifications, validation, and statistical methodology for design and analysis of the experiments. The aim is to increase reliability, efficiency, and auditability after the introduction of in-house-developed flow cytometry assays

Biological variables influencing the estimation of reference limits

<p>Reference limits (RLs) are required to evaluate laboratory results for medical decisions. The establishment of RL depends on the pre-analytical and the analytical conditions. Furthermore, biological characteristics of the sub-population chosen to provide the reference samples may influence the RL. The most important biological preconditions are gender, age, chronobiological influences, posture, regional and ethnic effects. The influence of these components varies and is often neglected. Therefore, a list of biological variables is collected from the literature and their influence on the estimation of RL is discussed. Biological preconditions must be specified if RL are reported as well for directly as for indirectly estimated RL. The influence of biological variables is especially important if RL established by direct methods are compared with those derived from indirect techniques. Even if these factors are not incorporated into the estimation of RL, their understanding can assist the interpretation of laboratory results of an individual.</p

Flow Cytometric Analyses of Lymphocyte Markers in Immune Oncology: A Comprehensive Guidance for Validation Practice According to Laws and Standards

Many anticancer therapies such as antibody-based therapies, cellular therapeutics (e.g., genetically modified cells, regulators of cytokine signaling, and signal transduction), and other biologically tailored interventions strongly influence the immune system and require tools for research, diagnosis, and monitoring. In flow cytometry, in vitro diagnostic (IVD) test kits that have been compiled and validated by the manufacturer are not available for all requirements. Laboratories are therefore usually dependent onmodifying commercially available assays or, most often, developing them to meet clinical needs. However, both variants must then undergo full validation to fulfill the IVD regulatory requirements. Flow cytometric immunophenotyping is a multiparametric analysis of parameters, some of which have to be repeatedly adjusted; that must be considered when developing specific antibody panels. Careful adjustments of general rules are required to meet legal and regulatory requirements in the analysis of these assays. Here, we describe the relevant regulatory framework for flow cytometry-based assays and describe methods for the introduction of new antibody combinations into routine work including development of performance specifications, validation, and statistical methodology for design and analysis of the experiments. The aim is to increase reliability, efficiency, and auditability after the introduction of in-house-developed flow cytometry assays

Flow Cytometric Analyses of Lymphocyte Markers in Immune Oncology: A Comprehensive Guidance for Validation Practice According to Laws and Standards

Many anticancer therapies such as antibody-based therapies, cellular therapeutics (e.g., genetically modified cells, regulators of cytokine signaling, and signal transduction), and other biologically tailored interventions strongly influence the immune system and require tools for research, diagnosis, and monitoring. In flow cytometry, in vitro diagnostic (IVD) test kits that have been compiled and validated by the manufacturer are not available for all requirements. Laboratories are therefore usually dependent onmodifying commercially available assays or, most often, developing them to meet clinical needs. However, both variants must then undergo full validation to fulfill the IVD regulatory requirements. Flow cytometric immunophenotyping is a multiparametric analysis of parameters, some of which have to be repeatedly adjusted; that must be considered when developing specific antibody panels. Careful adjustments of general rules are required to meet legal and regulatory requirements in the analysis of these assays. Here, we describe the relevant regulatory framework for flow cytometry-based assays and describe methods for the introduction of new antibody combinations into routine work including development of performance specifications, validation, and statistical methodology for design and analysis of the experiments. The aim is to increase reliability, efficiency, and auditability after the introduction of in-house-developed flow cytometry assays

The APAC Score: A Novel and Highly Performant Serological Tool for Early Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis

(1) Background: Surveillance of at-risk patients for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is highly necessary, as curative treatment options are only feasible in early disease stages. However, to date, screening of patients with liver cirrhosis for HCC mostly relies on suboptimal ultrasound-mediated evaluation and α-fetoprotein (AFP) measurement. Therefore, we sought to develop a novel and blood-based scoring tool for the identification of early-stage HCC. (2) Methods: Serum samples from 267 patients with liver cirrhosis, including 122 patients with HCC and 145 without, were collected. Expression levels of soluble platelet-derived growth factor receptor beta (sPDGFRβ) and routine clinical parameters were evaluated, and then utilized in logistic regression analysis. (3) Results: We developed a novel serological scoring tool, the APAC score, consisting of the parameters age, sPDGFRβ, AFP, and creatinine, which identified patients with HCC in a cirrhotic population with an AUC of 0.9503, which was significantly better than the GALAD score (AUC: 0.9000, p = 0.0031). Moreover, the diagnostic accuracy of the APAC score was independent of disease etiology, including alcohol (AUC: 0.9317), viral infection (AUC: 0.9561), and NAFLD (AUC: 0.9545). For the detection of patients with (very) early (BCLC 0/A) HCC stage or within Milan criteria, the APAC score achieved an AUC of 0.9317 (sensitivity: 85.2%, specificity: 89.2%) and 0.9488 (sensitivity: 91.1%, specificity 85.3%), respectively. (4) Conclusions: The APAC score is a novel and highly accurate serological tool for the identification of HCC, especially for early stages. It is superior to the currently proposed blood-based algorithms, and has the potential to improve surveillance of the at-risk population

Requirements for electronic laboratory reports according to the German guideline Rili-BAEK and ISO 15189

Objectives: Legal regulations and guidelines such as the Guidelines of the German Medical Association for the Quality Assurance of Laboratory Medical Examinations (Rili-BAEK) and ISO 15189 apply to electronic laboratory reports. However, many laboratories struggle with practical implementation of these regulations and guidelines. Methods: Laboratory and legal experts analyse the relevant guidelines and provide checklists and practical recommendations for implementation. Results: Laboratories have less control over the display of electronic laboratory reports than over paper documents. However, an electronic report alone is legally sufficient and need not be accompanied by a paper copy. Rili-BAEK and ISO 15189 stipulate a set of minimum information in every report. The laboratory must verify that reports are transmitted and displayed correctly. To help laboratories do so, agreements between laboratories and the report recipients can clarify responsibilities. Conclusions: Electronic laboratory reports can improve patient care, but laboratories need to verify their quality. Towards this end, Rili-BAEK and ISO 15189 set out helpful provisions