Cargando…

Partial analytical validation of the VetScan cPL rapid test

BACKGROUND: Serum canine pancreatic lipase immunoreactivity (cPLI) concentrations have become the standard laboratory test used to diagnose canine pancreatitis. Recently, a new point‐of‐care assay for cPLI, the VetScan cPL rapid test (VetScan cPL), has become available, but analytical validation dat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Steiner, Joerg M., Guadiano, Phillip, Gomez, Robynne R., Suchodolski, Jan S., Lidbury, Jonathan A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6973129/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31692006
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/vcp.12796
_version_ 1783489982527176704
author Steiner, Joerg M.
Guadiano, Phillip
Gomez, Robynne R.
Suchodolski, Jan S.
Lidbury, Jonathan A.
author_facet Steiner, Joerg M.
Guadiano, Phillip
Gomez, Robynne R.
Suchodolski, Jan S.
Lidbury, Jonathan A.
author_sort Steiner, Joerg M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Serum canine pancreatic lipase immunoreactivity (cPLI) concentrations have become the standard laboratory test used to diagnose canine pancreatitis. Recently, a new point‐of‐care assay for cPLI, the VetScan cPL rapid test (VetScan cPL), has become available, but analytical validation data have not yet been published. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to perform a partial analytical validation of the VetScan cPL. METHODS: Leftover serum samples from a diagnostic laboratory were used. Adherence to the manufacturer's guidelines, linearity, repeatability, and reproducibility were evaluated. Results of the VetScan cPL were correlated with the Spec cPL results. RESULTS: Observed‐to‐expected ratios for dilutional parallelism ranged from 77.4% to 162.9% (mean 119.3%). Intra‐assay and inter‐assay variabilities ranged from 16.9% to 36.7% (mean 25.1%) and from 14.1% to 51.2% (mean 31.8%), respectively. Adherence to the manufacturer's specification regarding results within ± 60 µg/L of the Spec cPL result was only achieved for 39% of the measurements. The VetScan cPL and Spec cPL correlation showed a Spearman's r of .758 for 29 data pairs. CONCLUSIONS: Under the conditions of this study, the VetScan cPL did not adhere to the manufacturer's specifications for most measurements. Also, the VetScan cPL showed suboptimal linearity and was not precise. In conclusion, the VetScan cPL failed basic analytical validation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6973129
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69731292020-01-27 Partial analytical validation of the VetScan cPL rapid test Steiner, Joerg M. Guadiano, Phillip Gomez, Robynne R. Suchodolski, Jan S. Lidbury, Jonathan A. Vet Clin Pathol Clinical Chemistry BACKGROUND: Serum canine pancreatic lipase immunoreactivity (cPLI) concentrations have become the standard laboratory test used to diagnose canine pancreatitis. Recently, a new point‐of‐care assay for cPLI, the VetScan cPL rapid test (VetScan cPL), has become available, but analytical validation data have not yet been published. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to perform a partial analytical validation of the VetScan cPL. METHODS: Leftover serum samples from a diagnostic laboratory were used. Adherence to the manufacturer's guidelines, linearity, repeatability, and reproducibility were evaluated. Results of the VetScan cPL were correlated with the Spec cPL results. RESULTS: Observed‐to‐expected ratios for dilutional parallelism ranged from 77.4% to 162.9% (mean 119.3%). Intra‐assay and inter‐assay variabilities ranged from 16.9% to 36.7% (mean 25.1%) and from 14.1% to 51.2% (mean 31.8%), respectively. Adherence to the manufacturer's specification regarding results within ± 60 µg/L of the Spec cPL result was only achieved for 39% of the measurements. The VetScan cPL and Spec cPL correlation showed a Spearman's r of .758 for 29 data pairs. CONCLUSIONS: Under the conditions of this study, the VetScan cPL did not adhere to the manufacturer's specifications for most measurements. Also, the VetScan cPL showed suboptimal linearity and was not precise. In conclusion, the VetScan cPL failed basic analytical validation. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-11-06 2019-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6973129/ /pubmed/31692006 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/vcp.12796 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Veterinary Clinical Pathology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Veterinary Clinical Pathology This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Chemistry
Steiner, Joerg M.
Guadiano, Phillip
Gomez, Robynne R.
Suchodolski, Jan S.
Lidbury, Jonathan A.
Partial analytical validation of the VetScan cPL rapid test
title Partial analytical validation of the VetScan cPL rapid test
title_full Partial analytical validation of the VetScan cPL rapid test
title_fullStr Partial analytical validation of the VetScan cPL rapid test
title_full_unstemmed Partial analytical validation of the VetScan cPL rapid test
title_short Partial analytical validation of the VetScan cPL rapid test
title_sort partial analytical validation of the vetscan cpl rapid test
topic Clinical Chemistry
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6973129/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31692006
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/vcp.12796
work_keys_str_mv AT steinerjoergm partialanalyticalvalidationofthevetscancplrapidtest
AT guadianophillip partialanalyticalvalidationofthevetscancplrapidtest
AT gomezrobynner partialanalyticalvalidationofthevetscancplrapidtest
AT suchodolskijans partialanalyticalvalidationofthevetscancplrapidtest
AT lidburyjonathana partialanalyticalvalidationofthevetscancplrapidtest