Cargando…

European follow-up of incorrect biomarker results for colorectal cancer demonstrates the importance of quality improvement projects

Biomarker analysis for colorectal cancer has been shown to be reliable in Europe with 97% of samples tested by EQA participants to be correctly classified. This study focuses on errors during the annual EQA assessment. The aim was to explore the causes and actions related to the observed errors and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Keppens, Cleo, Dufraing, Kelly, van Krieken, Han J., Siebers, Albert G., Kafatos, George, Lowe, Kimberly, Demonty, Gaston, Dequeker, Elisabeth M. C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6611891/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30719547
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00428-019-02525-9
_version_ 1783432784871686144
author Keppens, Cleo
Dufraing, Kelly
van Krieken, Han J.
Siebers, Albert G.
Kafatos, George
Lowe, Kimberly
Demonty, Gaston
Dequeker, Elisabeth M. C.
author_facet Keppens, Cleo
Dufraing, Kelly
van Krieken, Han J.
Siebers, Albert G.
Kafatos, George
Lowe, Kimberly
Demonty, Gaston
Dequeker, Elisabeth M. C.
author_sort Keppens, Cleo
collection PubMed
description Biomarker analysis for colorectal cancer has been shown to be reliable in Europe with 97% of samples tested by EQA participants to be correctly classified. This study focuses on errors during the annual EQA assessment. The aim was to explore the causes and actions related to the observed errors and to provide feedback and assess any improvement between 2016 and 2017. An electronic survey was sent to all laboratories with minimum one genotyping error or technical failure on ten tumor samples. A workshop was organized based on 2016 survey responses. Improvement of performance in 2017 was assessed for returning participants (n = 76), survey respondents (n = 13) and workshop participants (n = 4). Survey respondents and workshop participants improved in terms of (maximum) analysis score, successful participation, and genotyping errors compared to all returning participants. In 2016, mostly pre- and post-analytical errors (both 25%) were observed caused by unsuitability of the tumor tissue for molecular analysis. In 2017, most errors were due to analytical problems (50.0%) caused by methodological problems. The most common actions taken (n = 58) were protocol revisions (34.5%) and staff training (15.5%). In 24.1% of issues identified no action was performed. Corrective actions were linked to an improved performance, especially if performed by the pathologist. Although biomarker testing has improved over time, error occurrence at different phases stresses the need for quality improvement throughout the test process. Participation to quality improvement projects and a close collaboration with the pathologist can have a positive influence on performance. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00428-019-02525-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6611891
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66118912019-07-23 European follow-up of incorrect biomarker results for colorectal cancer demonstrates the importance of quality improvement projects Keppens, Cleo Dufraing, Kelly van Krieken, Han J. Siebers, Albert G. Kafatos, George Lowe, Kimberly Demonty, Gaston Dequeker, Elisabeth M. C. Virchows Arch Original Article Biomarker analysis for colorectal cancer has been shown to be reliable in Europe with 97% of samples tested by EQA participants to be correctly classified. This study focuses on errors during the annual EQA assessment. The aim was to explore the causes and actions related to the observed errors and to provide feedback and assess any improvement between 2016 and 2017. An electronic survey was sent to all laboratories with minimum one genotyping error or technical failure on ten tumor samples. A workshop was organized based on 2016 survey responses. Improvement of performance in 2017 was assessed for returning participants (n = 76), survey respondents (n = 13) and workshop participants (n = 4). Survey respondents and workshop participants improved in terms of (maximum) analysis score, successful participation, and genotyping errors compared to all returning participants. In 2016, mostly pre- and post-analytical errors (both 25%) were observed caused by unsuitability of the tumor tissue for molecular analysis. In 2017, most errors were due to analytical problems (50.0%) caused by methodological problems. The most common actions taken (n = 58) were protocol revisions (34.5%) and staff training (15.5%). In 24.1% of issues identified no action was performed. Corrective actions were linked to an improved performance, especially if performed by the pathologist. Although biomarker testing has improved over time, error occurrence at different phases stresses the need for quality improvement throughout the test process. Participation to quality improvement projects and a close collaboration with the pathologist can have a positive influence on performance. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00428-019-02525-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019-02-05 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6611891/ /pubmed/30719547 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00428-019-02525-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 OpenAccessThis 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.
spellingShingle Original Article
Keppens, Cleo
Dufraing, Kelly
van Krieken, Han J.
Siebers, Albert G.
Kafatos, George
Lowe, Kimberly
Demonty, Gaston
Dequeker, Elisabeth M. C.
European follow-up of incorrect biomarker results for colorectal cancer demonstrates the importance of quality improvement projects
title European follow-up of incorrect biomarker results for colorectal cancer demonstrates the importance of quality improvement projects
title_full European follow-up of incorrect biomarker results for colorectal cancer demonstrates the importance of quality improvement projects
title_fullStr European follow-up of incorrect biomarker results for colorectal cancer demonstrates the importance of quality improvement projects
title_full_unstemmed European follow-up of incorrect biomarker results for colorectal cancer demonstrates the importance of quality improvement projects
title_short European follow-up of incorrect biomarker results for colorectal cancer demonstrates the importance of quality improvement projects
title_sort european follow-up of incorrect biomarker results for colorectal cancer demonstrates the importance of quality improvement projects
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6611891/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30719547
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00428-019-02525-9
work_keys_str_mv AT keppenscleo europeanfollowupofincorrectbiomarkerresultsforcolorectalcancerdemonstratestheimportanceofqualityimprovementprojects
AT dufraingkelly europeanfollowupofincorrectbiomarkerresultsforcolorectalcancerdemonstratestheimportanceofqualityimprovementprojects
AT vankriekenhanj europeanfollowupofincorrectbiomarkerresultsforcolorectalcancerdemonstratestheimportanceofqualityimprovementprojects
AT siebersalbertg europeanfollowupofincorrectbiomarkerresultsforcolorectalcancerdemonstratestheimportanceofqualityimprovementprojects
AT kafatosgeorge europeanfollowupofincorrectbiomarkerresultsforcolorectalcancerdemonstratestheimportanceofqualityimprovementprojects
AT lowekimberly europeanfollowupofincorrectbiomarkerresultsforcolorectalcancerdemonstratestheimportanceofqualityimprovementprojects
AT demontygaston europeanfollowupofincorrectbiomarkerresultsforcolorectalcancerdemonstratestheimportanceofqualityimprovementprojects
AT dequekerelisabethmc europeanfollowupofincorrectbiomarkerresultsforcolorectalcancerdemonstratestheimportanceofqualityimprovementprojects