Cargando…

Measurement of HbA1c in multicentre diabetes trials – should blood samples be tested locally or sent to a central laboratory: an agreement analysis

BACKGROUND: Glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) is an important outcome measure in diabetes clinical trials. For multicentre designs, HbA1c can be measured locally at participating centres or by sending blood samples to a central laboratory. This study analyses the agreement between local and central measu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Arch, Barbara N., Blair, Joanne, McKay, Andrew, Gregory, John W., Newland, Paul, Gamble, Carrol
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5078896/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27776543
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1640-6
_version_ 1782462472417968128
author Arch, Barbara N.
Blair, Joanne
McKay, Andrew
Gregory, John W.
Newland, Paul
Gamble, Carrol
author_facet Arch, Barbara N.
Blair, Joanne
McKay, Andrew
Gregory, John W.
Newland, Paul
Gamble, Carrol
author_sort Arch, Barbara N.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) is an important outcome measure in diabetes clinical trials. For multicentre designs, HbA1c can be measured locally at participating centres or by sending blood samples to a central laboratory. This study analyses the agreement between local and central measurements, using 1-year follow-up data collected in a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) of newly diagnosed children with type I diabetes. METHODS: HbA1c measurements were routinely analysed both locally and centrally at baseline and then at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and the data reported in mmol/mol. Agreement was assessed by calculating the bias and 95 % limits of agreement, using the Bland-Altman analysis method. A predetermined benchmark for clinically acceptable margin of error between measurements was subjectively set as ±10 % for HbA1c. The percentage of pairs of measurements that were classified as clinically acceptable was calculated. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the agreement within centres. Treatment group was not considered. RESULTS: Five hundred and ninety pairs of measurement, representing 255 children and 15 trial centres across four follow-up time points, were compared. There was no significant bias: local measurements were an average of 0.16 mmol/mol (SD = 4.5, 95 % CI −0.2 to 0.5) higher than central. The 95 % limits of agreement were −8.6 to 9.0 mmol/mol (local minus central). Eighty percent of local measurements were within ±10 % of corresponding central measurements. Some trial centres were more varied in the differences observed between local and central measurements: IQRs ranging from 3 to 9 mmol/mol; none indicated systematic bias. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in agreement between HbA1c measurements was greater than had been expected although no overall bias was detected and standard deviations were similar. Discrepancies were present across all participating centres. These findings have implications for the comparison of standards of clinical care between centres, the design of future multicentre RCTs and existing quality assurance processes for HbA1c measurements. We recommend that centralised HbA1c measurement is preferable in the multicentre clinical trial setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Eudract No. 2010-023792-25, registered on 4 November 2010.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5078896
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50788962016-10-31 Measurement of HbA1c in multicentre diabetes trials – should blood samples be tested locally or sent to a central laboratory: an agreement analysis Arch, Barbara N. Blair, Joanne McKay, Andrew Gregory, John W. Newland, Paul Gamble, Carrol Trials Research BACKGROUND: Glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) is an important outcome measure in diabetes clinical trials. For multicentre designs, HbA1c can be measured locally at participating centres or by sending blood samples to a central laboratory. This study analyses the agreement between local and central measurements, using 1-year follow-up data collected in a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) of newly diagnosed children with type I diabetes. METHODS: HbA1c measurements were routinely analysed both locally and centrally at baseline and then at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and the data reported in mmol/mol. Agreement was assessed by calculating the bias and 95 % limits of agreement, using the Bland-Altman analysis method. A predetermined benchmark for clinically acceptable margin of error between measurements was subjectively set as ±10 % for HbA1c. The percentage of pairs of measurements that were classified as clinically acceptable was calculated. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the agreement within centres. Treatment group was not considered. RESULTS: Five hundred and ninety pairs of measurement, representing 255 children and 15 trial centres across four follow-up time points, were compared. There was no significant bias: local measurements were an average of 0.16 mmol/mol (SD = 4.5, 95 % CI −0.2 to 0.5) higher than central. The 95 % limits of agreement were −8.6 to 9.0 mmol/mol (local minus central). Eighty percent of local measurements were within ±10 % of corresponding central measurements. Some trial centres were more varied in the differences observed between local and central measurements: IQRs ranging from 3 to 9 mmol/mol; none indicated systematic bias. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in agreement between HbA1c measurements was greater than had been expected although no overall bias was detected and standard deviations were similar. Discrepancies were present across all participating centres. These findings have implications for the comparison of standards of clinical care between centres, the design of future multicentre RCTs and existing quality assurance processes for HbA1c measurements. We recommend that centralised HbA1c measurement is preferable in the multicentre clinical trial setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Eudract No. 2010-023792-25, registered on 4 November 2010. BioMed Central 2016-10-24 /pmc/articles/PMC5078896/ /pubmed/27776543 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1640-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Arch, Barbara N.
Blair, Joanne
McKay, Andrew
Gregory, John W.
Newland, Paul
Gamble, Carrol
Measurement of HbA1c in multicentre diabetes trials – should blood samples be tested locally or sent to a central laboratory: an agreement analysis
title Measurement of HbA1c in multicentre diabetes trials – should blood samples be tested locally or sent to a central laboratory: an agreement analysis
title_full Measurement of HbA1c in multicentre diabetes trials – should blood samples be tested locally or sent to a central laboratory: an agreement analysis
title_fullStr Measurement of HbA1c in multicentre diabetes trials – should blood samples be tested locally or sent to a central laboratory: an agreement analysis
title_full_unstemmed Measurement of HbA1c in multicentre diabetes trials – should blood samples be tested locally or sent to a central laboratory: an agreement analysis
title_short Measurement of HbA1c in multicentre diabetes trials – should blood samples be tested locally or sent to a central laboratory: an agreement analysis
title_sort measurement of hba1c in multicentre diabetes trials – should blood samples be tested locally or sent to a central laboratory: an agreement analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5078896/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27776543
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1640-6
work_keys_str_mv AT archbarbaran measurementofhba1cinmulticentrediabetestrialsshouldbloodsamplesbetestedlocallyorsenttoacentrallaboratoryanagreementanalysis
AT blairjoanne measurementofhba1cinmulticentrediabetestrialsshouldbloodsamplesbetestedlocallyorsenttoacentrallaboratoryanagreementanalysis
AT mckayandrew measurementofhba1cinmulticentrediabetestrialsshouldbloodsamplesbetestedlocallyorsenttoacentrallaboratoryanagreementanalysis
AT gregoryjohnw measurementofhba1cinmulticentrediabetestrialsshouldbloodsamplesbetestedlocallyorsenttoacentrallaboratoryanagreementanalysis
AT newlandpaul measurementofhba1cinmulticentrediabetestrialsshouldbloodsamplesbetestedlocallyorsenttoacentrallaboratoryanagreementanalysis
AT gamblecarrol measurementofhba1cinmulticentrediabetestrialsshouldbloodsamplesbetestedlocallyorsenttoacentrallaboratoryanagreementanalysis