Upload
hoangcong
View
212
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
EXTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL OF MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTIC METHODS
Anton M. van Loon1,2,Colin Steel2, Calum Scott2 and Paul Wallace2
1 :Department of Virology, UMC Utrecht, The Netherlands2 :Quality Control for Molecular Diagnostics, Glasgow, Scotland
EU-QCCA
EXTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL ?
• Integral part of a laboratory quality management system
• Detection of weak spots in performance
• Improvement of reliability of results, gives confidence
• Comparison of performance with other laboratories
• Provision of uniform reference level when International Standards are lacking
• Expensive, but saves money
External Quality Control in Europe : 1998
• No uniform regulatory system for medical laboratories across Europe
• Most countries have QC organisations for external proficiency testing ( NEQAS, INSTAND, EQUALIS, SKMM etc.)
• Differences in approaches, but regular proficiency testing mainly focused on(virus)culture and serology.
• Lack of International Standards or reference reagents for molecular testing
• High rate of false-positives ( > 20 % ); sensitivity often unclear
• European Union Concerted Action for Quality Control (EU-QCCA)of MolecularMethods in Diagnostic Virology : Start in March 1998
• Endorsement by European Society for Clinical Virology and major diagnosticindustries (ILC)
European Union Concerted Action for Quality Controlof Molecular Diagnosis in Diagnostic Microbiology
(EU-QCCA)
AIM• To establish an external quality control programme for
assessment and evaluation of existing and evolvingnucleic acid amplification procedures in diagnostic virology
STRATEGY• Preparation and distribution of proficiency panels• Organisation of (virtual)post-distribution workshops• Production of reference materials e.g.‘run controls’
EU-QCCA PROFICIENCY PANELS
• Purpose : to help labs to determine their own performance• Composition determined by QCCA Working Groups• Consist of 8 - 12 samples• Include different sero/genotypes at various concentrations• Preferably inactivated and freeze-dried to improve stability
and facilitate shipment• Reporting time 4 - 6 weeks• Accompanied by questionnaire on technical details• Results of distribution published in detailed reports and
scientific publications
EU-QCCA Proficiency Panels : Number of Participants
Agent 1998/99 2000 2001
Enteroviruses 63 52 79
HSV 71 75 86
CMV - - 98
HBV 46 62 -
HCV 63 91 -
HIV 58 76 -
Chlamydia trachomatis
-
105 -
TB - - (80)
Enteroviruses
Viral Diagnosis• most frequent cause of aseptic meningitis• virus culture (CSF) increasingly replaced by NAT’s• NAT’S mostly in-house developed• sensitivity and specificity often unknown
Research• Association reported with chronic conditions as ALS, chronic
fatigue syndrome, post-polio syndrome
Enterovirus proficiency panels
• Panels consisting of 12 samples • Include various serotypes / genogroups (prototypes/
clinical isolates )• Include dilution series (PBS/ 5% FBS)• Consist of inactivated, freeze-dried culture supernatants• Production at UMC Utrecht; freeze drying at SVM• Predistribution testing at 2 reference laboratories• Shipment at ambient temperature, non-hazardous goods• Each panel accompanied by technical questionnaire
Distribution characteristics
1998/99 2000 2001
Participating laboratories 63 52 79 Number of countries 17 15 19
Reporting laboratories 59 46 68 Reported datasets 70 50 81 Evaluable datasets 69 47 78
FIRST EV PANEL: COMPOSITION AND RESULTS
Code Virus Titre
Reference labs
Participants (n=70)
TCID50/ml Geq/ml* 1 2 No positive
A01 EC9 104 107 + + 69
A02 EC9 102 104 + + 60
A03 Neg - - - - 2
A04 EC22 3.2x104 N.D. - - 3
A07 Neg - - - - 3
A08 PV2 1.6x103 104 + + 64
* : Based on experimental QPCR for CB3 (P. Muir)
FIRST EV PANEL: COMPOSITION AND RESULTS
Code Virus Titre
Reference labs
Participants (n=70)
TCID50/ml Geq/ml 1 2 No positive$
A05 CA9
4x102 107 + + 69
A12 CA9 4x102 107 + + 69
A06 CA9 40 106 + + 63 (62)
A09 CA9 4 105 + + 55 (54)
A10 CA9 4x10-1 104 - + 30 (28)
A11 CA9 4x10-2 103 - - 10 (8)
* : Based on experimental QPCR for CB3 (P. Muir) $ : Between brackets: No of correct dilution series
EV FIRST PANEL: QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
Type of sample Code No of correct data sets (n=70)
Strong positive A01, 05, 06, 08, 12 59 (84%)
Positive A02, 09 52 (74%)
Weak-positive* A10, 11 31 (44%)
Negative A03, 07 66 (94%)
Strong positive, positive, negative
see above 46 (66%)
*: one or both samples /
1st EV PANEL: SCORE VS. TYPE OF ASSAY
99108-98-9Median
101324<7
1033137
3--3-8
2095249
182112310
7141111
TOTAL(n=68)
Roche(n=16)
Nested(n=26)
Semi-nested(n=11)
Single(n=15)
Type of PCRSCORE
PERFORMANCE SCORES ON QCMD EV-03
9.41--2811Other commercial
7.01--113NASBA
6.83--126Real-Time PCR
8.542171125Nested PCR
7.9312-511Semi-nested PCR
8.552-31020Single PCR
MEAN<778910- 11nASSAY
SCORE VS EXTRACTION METHOD : EV- A PANEL
Extraction
method N Score (points)
≤ 8 9 ≥ 10 Chaotropic agent 10 ΓΓ Φ Silica extraction 6 ΓΓΦ Γ Proteinase K 2 Γ Γ QIAmp Viral RNA 14 Γ ΓΦΦ ΓΓΦ Trizol reagent 5 ΦΦ TRI reagent 4 ΦΦ RNAzolB 3 Γ Γ High pure isolation 3 Γ Γ : single PCR Φ: semi-nested PCR : nested PCR
SCORE VS REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE: EV- A PANEL
RT Enzyme
N Score (points)
≤ 8 9 ≥ 10
AMV 15 ΓΓΓΦΦΦ Φ ΓΦ
MMLV 25 ΓΦΦ ΓΓΓΦ ΓΓΦ
Γ : single PCR Φ: semi-nested PCR : nested PCR
SCORE VS DETECTION METHOD : EV - A PANEL
Detection Method
N Score (points)
≤ 8 9 ≥10
Gelelectro-phoresis
35 ΓΓΦΦΦΦΦ
ΦΦ ΓΦΦΦ
Hybridisation
16 ΓΓΓΓΓΦ ΓΓΓΓ ΓΓΓ
Γ : single PCR Φ: semi-nested PCR : nested PCR
QCMD Proficiency Testing : False-Positivity rate
1.0%--9Chlamydia trachomatis
2.4%--72Cytomegalovirus
-0.9%1.2%17 – 24Hepatitis C virus
-1.4%5.3%39 – 44Hepatitis B virus
-1.5%2.4%8 – 11Human immunodeficiency virus
5.8%8.1%4.8%89 – 95Herpes simplex virus
1.2%4.0%3.6%76 – 95Enteroviruses
200120001998/99% In-house assays
Agent
SCORE VS TYPE OF ASSAY: HIV
Panel 1 Panel 2
Assay No. Score No. Score
Commercial
8 7 ≤6 8 7 ≤6 bDNA 7 4 1 2 8 8 - - NASBA 7 0 4 3 8 1 2 5 RT-PCR 23
19 9
17 11 2
3 -
24 32
9 27
6 3
9 2
Hybrid Capture II - - - - 1 - - 1
In-house Qualitative 5 2 2 1 6 1 2 3 Quantitative 2 - 1 1 - - - -
Participant Results on First QCCA CytomegalovirusProficiency Panel- Qualitative ( n = 105 )
105
0
102
3
101
4
92
13
57
48
25
80
2
103 104
1
98
7
60
45
19
86
3
102
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Number of
Data-Sets
80,000 20,000 5,000 1,300 320 80 0 5,000 1,300 320 80 0Viral Load (GEq/ml)
No. Positive No. Negative
QCMD - CMV01: Scores on Qualitative Results
ASSAY n 12-11 10 9 8 7 <7
Qualitative • in-house • commercial
57 14
9 3
9 1
19 4
12 5
6 1
2 0
Quantitative* • in-house • commercial
17 12
7 1
6 2
1 4
1 3
1 2
1 0
* : Quantitative results were converted to pos/neg results before scoring
PROBLEMS IN PROFICIENCY TESTING OF MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTIC ASSAYS: EXPERIENCE EU-QCCA
• Lack of international standard preparations
• Logistics : shipment / payments
• Inactivation/freeze drying (f.e. HBV, HCV)
• Panel samples to resemble clinical material (EV, HSV )
• Timely, high quality reporting to participants
• Achieving required level of quality/professionalism/QC system
• Costs
European Union Concerted Action for Quality Control of Nucleic Acid Amplification in Diagnostic Virology
STATUS (August 2001)
• Third year of program: EU sponsoring would stop bySeptember 2001; at the time, no suitable EU program identified for sponsoring (5th FP: QL, Growth; DG-SANCO)
• Request for continuation (ESCV, ESCMID, Industry)
• Need for further expansion of the program and increase in professionalism
• Business plan prepared, including grants from Industry
• QCMD : Quality Control for Molecular Diagnosis
QCMD STRATEGY
• Expand distributions : more pathogens and applications i.e. detection, quantitation, genotyping and sequencing, and more countries
• Develop International Standards and Working Reagents, partlyin collaboration with other organisations
• Set up an interactive web-site to present and promote the programme, to collect, publish and discuss results of distributions, and to provide a forum for technical and scientificdiscussions (www.qcmd.org)
• Present the programme and its results at scientific meetings, in scientific journals and to accreditation bodies etc.
REQUIREMENTS FOR AN EXTERNAL QUALITY ASSESMENTORGANISATION
- Independency : a not-for-profit organisation without commercial, financial or professional conflicting interests
- Transparancy : clear structure of organisation and of responsibilities
- Reliability : confidence in independent judgement
- Respectability : organisation managed by experts in the field
- Confidentiality : establishment of a neutral office
- Quality : quality management system, compliance with international guidelines/directives (ISO, CEN, EU)
UMCVirology
Board
EXECUTIVE
ILC (Industry LiaisonCommittee)
ESCMID
ESCV
Neutral &Executive Office
Contractors
TYPR.Schuurman
CNSA. Linde
STDJ. Schirm
BBVB. Niesters
RESPG. Ieven
QCMD Organisation Structure
OTHER
(WHO/EU)
EXECUTIVE : Graham Cleator, Paul Klapper,
Jim Reid, Anton M. van Loon (chair)
OFFICE : Paul Wallace
BOARD : Executive members
Chairs WP’s
Representatives ILC, ESCV, ESCMID,
major collaborating institutions
Quality Control for Molecular DiagnosticsWWW.QCMD.ORG
QUALITY CONTROL for MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS
Annual Program & Participant numbers
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
QCCA QCCA QCCA QCCA / QCMD QCMD
No.
of P
rogr
amm
es
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
No.
of P
artic
ipan
ts
No.programmesNo.participants
An International QC Programme
• Access to 107 countries worldwide
• 67 countries currently registered (general / interests)
• 45 countries actively participating in proficiency programmes
QUALITY CONTROL for MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS
QUALITY CONTROL for MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS
290
349
244
320
1 47
331 325
382
305
1 78
88
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
EV HSV VSV CMV EBV HIV HBV HCV CT TB NGo
P r ogr a mme I nt e r e st s
Ar ea Inter ests
QUALITY CONTROL for MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS
13 6
8 0
13 6
5 4
104 7
4
13
2 1
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
HIV MT TB MT HPV B19 JC SRS HAV Rota Res HHV6
Programme Interests (other)
Area Interests
Not final numbers *+Programme not startedxProgramme not done
+xxxxxLegionella pneumophila
+xxxxxNeisseria gonorrhoeae
91xxxxxVaricella zoster virus
+75xxxxEpstein Barr virus
+102xxxxHIV resistance genotyping
70*9698xxxCytomegalovirus
+8682xxxMycobacterium tuberculosis
122119x105xxChlamydia trachomatis
60*xxxxxHCV genotype
9283x8859xHepatitis C virus
7973x6145xHepatitis B virus
9069x7754xHuman immunodefiency virus
103102867368xHerpes simplex virus
10110577x5263Enterovirus
200320022001200019991998Programme
QUALITY CONTROL for MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS
The number of Participants for each distribution / year:
65.922.94.12.179.7984827411/05/2002MT
9.214.80.90.987.813081099807/03/2002HSV
90.014.60.00.684.8720906405/20/2002HIV
88.09.20.00.191.89921248005/20/2002HCV
51.511.92.10.189.2776977005/20/2002HBV
7.027.75.51.679.012001009306/10/2002EV
29.919.03.00.080.6603676112/17/2002EBV
87.946.00.60.966.8116011611103/18/2002CT
81.020.32.91.081.612601058911/05/2002CMV
%Commercial
assays
% False -veFrom totalpositiveSamples
% False +veFrom totalNegativeSamples
% equivocal
Totaltest
% correctTotal test
Total Tests
No. dataSets
No.Participants
Distribution Date
Programme Type
Summary of the 2002 Molecular QC programmes for Virology and Microbiology
QUALITY CONTROL for MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS
(University) Hospital
Laboratory61%
Reference Laboratory
6%
Public Health Laboratory
16%
Other2%
Manufacturer of Diagnostics
3%
Commercial / Private
Laboratory11%
STD Clinic Laboratory
1%
Research Laboratory
1%
QUALITY CONTROL for MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS
Major Participating Laboratory types:
Web30%
Fax62%
Letter8%
WebFaxLetter
Changes in Reporting types from 2002 to 2003
Web94%
Letter1%
Fax5%
QUALITY CONTROL for MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS
Summary and Conclusions
• An external QC organisation was established in 1998 (EU-QCCA) withpartial funding by EU
• Management by experts from the field• Fourteen distributions : 7 agents, 45-105 laboratories/distribution• Large variation in sensitivity, mainly with in-house methods• False-positivity rates between 1 - 8%; need for further improvement• EU-QCCA succeeded by QCMD (Sept. 2001)• Same approach with increase in quality/professionalism and dedicated,
full-time employees; compliance with guidelines (ISO, CEN, EU)• Commitment from ESCV, ESCMID and major diagnostic industry• Expansion of program to include more targets, applications, and also
more laboratories in more countries