Guest guest Posted August 19, 2008 Report Share Posted August 19, 2008 Hi, Not sure of this abstract has been posted. Its from the August 2008 Blood. Slowly but surely we are making our way towards more accurate reporting of PCRs...in clinical trials for a start. We are still quite a distance for regular CML management but its good to see progress being made. http://bloodjournal.hematologylibrary.org/cgi/content/abstract/112/3/5 16maxtoshow= & HITS=10 & hits=10 & RESULTFORMAT= & fulltext=druker & searchid=1 & FIRSTINDEX=0 & sortspec=date & resourcetype=HWCIT Cheers, DX 11/98 Desirable performance characteristics for BCR-ABL measurement on an international reporting scale to allow consistent interpretation of individual patient response and comparison of response rates between clinical trials Branford*, Fletcher, CP Cross, C Muller, s Hochhaus, Dong-Wook Kim, Jerald P. Radich, Giuseppe Saglio, Fabrizio Pane, Suzanne Kamel-Reid, Y. Lynn Wang, D Press, Lynch, Zbigniew Rudzki, M Goldman, and Institute of Medical and Veterinary Science, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia National Genetics Reference Laboratory, University of Southampton, Salisbury, United Kingdom Medizinische Fakultat Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany St 's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea, Republic of Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research, Seattle, WA, United States Ospedale Universita di Torino, Turin, Italy Hematology Unit, Ceinge and Dipartimento di Biochimica e Biotecnologie Mediche, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, NY, United States Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States Novartis Pharmaceuticals Australia, Sydney, Australia Imperial College at Hammersmith Hospital, London, United Kingdom * Corresponding author; email: susan.branford@.... An international basis for comparison of BCR-ABL mRNA levels is required for the common interpretation of data derived from individual laboratories. This will not only aid clinical decisions for individual patients with CML but also assist the interpretation of results from clinical studies. We aligned BCR-ABL values generated by 38 international laboratories to an international reporting scale (IS) where a major molecular response (MMR) is defined as 0.10%. Alignment was achieved by application of laboratory-specific conversion factors calculated by comparisons performed with patient samples against a reference method. A validation procedure was completed for 19 methods. We determined performance characteristics (bias and precision) for consistent interpretation of MMR after IS conversion. When methods achieved an average BCR-ABL difference of ±1.2-fold from the reference method and 95% limits of agreement within ±5-fold, the concordance of MMR was 91%. These criteria were met by 58% of methods. When not met, the MMR concordance was 74%. However, irrespective of the precision, when the bias was ±1.2-fold as achieved by 89% of methods, there was good agreement between the overall rates of MMR. This indicates that the IS can deliver accurate comparison of molecular response rates between clinical trials when measured by different laboratories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.