CLSI EP14 A3 : 2014
Superseded
A superseded Standard is one, which is fully replaced by another Standard, which is a new edition of the same Standard.
View Superseded by
EVALUATION OF COMMUTABILITY OF PROCESSED SAMPLES
Hardcopy , PDF
15-11-2022
English
25-08-2018
Abstract
Committee Membership
Foreword
1 Introduction
2 Commutability Determination Process
3 Conclusion
4 Supplement Information
References
Appendix A - Description of Mathematical Model Used
of Evaluating Commutability of Processed Samples
Using Deming Regression
Appendix B - Outlier Evaluation for a Measurement
Procedure Comparison Using Deming Regression
Appendix C - Examples of Completed Analyses
The Quality Management System Approach
Related CLSI Reference Materials
Gives guidance for evaluating the commutability of processed samples by determining if they behave differently than unprocessed patient samples when two quantitative measurement procedures are compared.
DevelopmentNote |
Supersedes CLSI EP14 A2. (08/2014)
|
DocumentType |
Miscellaneous Product
|
ISBN |
1-56238-971-8
|
Pages |
58
|
PublisherName |
Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute
|
Status |
Superseded
|
SupersededBy | |
Supersedes |
This guideline provides protocols that can evaluate commutability in any nonpatient processed samples when tested using quantitative measurement procedures. Such processed samples may be used for proficiency testing/external quality assessment (PT/EQA), measuring interval verification sample sets, or QC samples.The guideline is intended to be used by developers of commercial diagnostic tests as well as laboratory-developed tests, manufacturers of measuring interval sample sets and QC samples, and PT or EQA providers. This guideline may also be useful to all clinical laboratory professionals wishing to investigate a processed sample’s commutability. EP14 is intended to assist in the education of clinical laboratorians, regulators, and diagnostic manufacturers about the commutability of processed materials, and how a sample’s matrix can affect some measurand values and their interpretation (referred to as matrix effects). For example, professionals may not be warned of a matrix effect caused by the interaction of processed PT/EQA material and the measurement procedure, and therefore the data may suggest to them that erroneous patient results are being generated, when in fact the results may be acceptable. Examples of a matrix effect due to the interaction of a processed QC and certain reagent lot(s) exist in the literature.1 Therefore, these types of effects should not be a surprise to experienced laboratory staff and should not lead to erroneous conclusions about the same effect occurring in patient samples. This guideline should assist all interested parties in not only evaluating the presence or absence of a matrix effect, but also increasing awareness that there may be different levels of risk to the quality of patient care that are dependent on the intended use of a processed matrix.This guideline can also be used by laboratorians performing quantitative tests for a wide variety of measurands across various disciplines to understand the commutability of processed samples. This guideline does not apply to qualitative tests. Finally, an added benefit to following the protocol is that manufacturers and PT/EQA providers should be able to provide some documentation to government or accrediting agencies on processed samples commutability to help avoid false conclusions about the adequacy of patient testing.It should be noted that although the protocol in this document is intended to help distinguish between effects caused by measurement procedure malfunctions and those caused by use of artificial or human-based processed samples, it does not describe approaches that specifically establish the exact mechanism or reason for any observed noncommutability. This guideline does not apply to qualitative tests that supply only “yes/no” or “positive/negative” results.Also, it should be noted that this document is not intended to be used to evaluate sample type differences, such as serum vs plasma.
CLSI EP19 : 2ED 2015 | A FRAMEWORK FOR USING CLSI DOCUMENTS TO EVALUATE CLINICAL LABORATORY MEASUREMENT PROCEDURES |
CLSI QMS24 : 3ED 2016 | USING PROFICIENCY TESTING AND ALTERNATIVE ASSESSMENT TO IMPROVE MEDICAL LABORATORY QUALITY |
CLSI C57 : 1ED 2015 | MASS SPECTROMETRY FOR ANDROGEN AND ESTROGEN MEASUREMENTS IN SERUM |
CLSI EP36 : 1EDE 2015 | HARMONIZATION OF SYMBOLOGY AND EQUATIONS |
CLSI EP15 A3 : 3ED 2014 | USER VERIFICATION OF PRECISION AND ESTIMATION OF BIAS |
CLSI EP26 A : 1ED 2013 | USER EVALUATION OF BETWEEN-REAGENT LOT VARIATION |
CLSI EP9 A3 : 3ED 2013 | MEASUREMENT PROCEDURE COMPARISON AND BIAS ESTIMATION USING PATIENT SAMPLES |
CLSI EP6 A : 1ED 2003 | EVALUATION OF THE LINEARITY OF QUANTITATIVE MEASUREMENT PROCEDURES - A STATISTICAL APPROACH |
CLSI EP15 A2 : 2ED 2006 | USER VERIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE FOR PRECISION AND TRUENESS |
CLSI EP32 R : 1ED 2006 | METROLOGICAL TRACEABILITY AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION |
CLSI C59 A : 1ED 97(R2001) | APOLIPOPROTEIN IMMUNOASSAYS: DEVELOPMENT AND RECOMMENDED PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS |
CLSI M29 A4 : 4ED 2014 | Protection of Laboratory Workers From Occupationally Acquired Infections<br> |
CLSI EP30 A : 1ED 2010 | CHARACTERIZATION AND QUALIFICATION OF COMMUTABLE REFERENCE MATERIALS FOR LABORATORY MEDICINE |
Access your standards online with a subscription
Features
-
Simple online access to standards, technical information and regulations.
-
Critical updates of standards and customisable alerts and notifications.
-
Multi-user online standards collection: secure, flexible and cost effective.