harmonisation of laboratory profiles
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Harmonisation ofLaboratory Profiles
Tony Badrick
(AACB Harmonisation Committee)
![Page 2: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
The (Almost)Final Frontier –Profiles!
![Page 3: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
![Page 4: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
![Page 5: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
MBA
![Page 6: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Why Profiles
• Screening?
• Diagnostic?
• Monitoring?
![Page 7: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Core Tests in a Profile
• Is test specific to the organ or system?
• If not specific why include it?
• Does an abnormal result add additional diagnostic orprognostic information to the other tests?
• Does the added information justify the cost?
• Is there a clinical intervention available?
![Page 8: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
GROUP P2 - CHEMICAL
66500
Quantitation in serum, plasma, urine or other body fluid(except amniotic fluid), by any method except reagent tabletor reagent strip (with or without reflectance meter) of: acidphosphatase, alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkalinephosphatase, ammonia, amylase, aspartate aminotransferase,bicarbonate, bilirubin (total), bilirubin (any fractions), C-reactive protein, calcium (total or corrected for albumin),chloride, creatine kinase, creatinine, gamma glutamyltransferase, globulin, glucose, lactate dehydrogenase, lipase,magnesium, phosphate, potassium, sodium, total protein,total cholesterol, triglycerides, urate or urea - 1 testFee: $9.70 Benefit: 75% = $7.30 85% = $8.25
665032 tests described in item 66500Fee: $11.65 Benefit: 75% = $8.75 85% = $9.95
66506
3 tests described in item 66500Fee: $13.65 Benefit: 75% = $10.25 85% =$11.65
66509
4 tests described in item 66500Fee: $15.65 Benefit: 75% = $11.75 85% =$13.35
66512
5 or more tests described in item 66500Fee: $17.70 Benefit: 75% = $13.30 85% =$15.05
![Page 9: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Financial Incentives
• Cost of average profile test - <0.20c
• Incentive to do 5.
![Page 10: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Renal
![Page 11: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Electrolytes
![Page 12: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Urea and Electrolyte Profile
• Chloride –comes with Na/K but still a cost
• Bicarbonate – useful in acute illness
• Urea- adds little
• False positives• cost
![Page 13: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Bone
![Page 14: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Bone and Calcium
• ?Phosphate
• Albumin
![Page 15: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
LFT
![Page 16: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Opportunistic Screening
• AST, GGT – Alcohol abuse
• Total Protein - paraproteinaemia
![Page 17: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Total Protein in LFTIncluded as a screen for monoclonal gammopathy.
Can opportunistic case-finding of paraproteins be clinically justified?Ann Clin Biochem. 2005 Jul;42(Pt 4):245-53. Beetham R, Howie N, Soutar R.
1% of all malignancies.
Definition of hyperproteinaemia – hypergammaglobulinaemia
Cost effective?
Intervention?
Bhoji Watts, Leslie Burnett, and Doug Chesher Measurement of Total Protein Is Not aUseful Inclusion in Liver Function Test Profiles Clinical Chemistry 2000; v. 46, p.1022-1023. $1.2 million unnecessary expenditure
![Page 18: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Standard Profile: Alt, Ast, GGT, Bili, AlP, Protein,Alb, GlobAge/Sex Reference intervalAny abnormality in any test followed up
![Page 19: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
• Patient and clinical characteristics, including age, sex, ethnic group, countryof birth, reason for blood testing, medication and history of illness,substance abuse, travel, immunisation and transfusion history;
• Alcohol use, via a standardised questionnaire;• Weight, height, waist and hip circumference measurements;• Repeat of the eight-analyte LFT panel;• Blood for specific (auto-immune, genetic and viral) diseases in the ‘liver
work up’ ;• Ultrasound scan (USS) of the upper abdomen. Any tumours of the
hepatobiliary system were noted and the liver was classified as normal,echobright (in three levels of intensity) or cirrhotic. A sample of ultrasoundfilms were reviewed by the study radiologist.
• 2 year followup
![Page 20: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Results
• 1290 patients
• 32 cases with hepatcellular (2.5%)• 12 with biliary (0.9%)• Cancer 9 cases
• Most efficient panel for significant liver disease is Alt + ALP• TP to FP 1:48
![Page 21: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Results
• <5% of people with an abnormal LFT panelhad liver disease
• 1.7% needed treatment (antiviral/venesection)
![Page 22: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
A recent large general practice study based in Birmingham, 1118 patientswith raised liver enzymes were thoroughly investigated, and a liver relatedcause could only be identified in 55% of patients.
Continued reliance on alanine transaminase (ALT) elevation hascontributed to both over-referral;
in one study, 33% of secondary care referrals from general practitioners oninvestigation had simple steatosis only, as well as under-referral;
nearly 50% of those who required investigations in primary care wereneither referred nor adequately investigated in another study from thesame region.
Evidence for the use of liver enzymes as a screening test
Presence and severity of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in a largeprospective primary care cohort. Matthew J. Armstrong, Diarmaid D. Houlihan, et alJournal of Hepatology, Volume 56, Issue 1 , Pages 234-240, 2012.
![Page 23: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
All Causes of Abnormal LFT
Cause Percentage (n)
NAFLD 26.4 (295)At-risk alcohol intake
Non-Fatty liverFatty liver
14.0 (156)11.3 (126)
PBC 0.81 (9)HBV 0.72 (8)Haemochromatosis
Homozygote [C282Yor H63D] Comp.heterozygote[C282Y + H63D]
Other (inc. cancer,drug, abscess)
0.54 (6)
0.36 (4)
0.36 (4)
HCV* 0.17 (2)PSC* 0.17 (2)A1AD* 0.17 (2)Unexplained group 45.1 (504)
![Page 24: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Frequency of Abnormal LFT Tests inNAFLD
![Page 25: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
AST/ALT is validated as a marker of severity in chronic liver diseasessecondary to alcohol, NAFLD , and primary sclerosing cholangitis.
AST/ALT reflects the structural changes (the degree of liver fibrosis) within theliver which precede any deterioration in liver function.
Cut-off value of 0.8 for the AST/ ALT ratio, and in combination withestablished risk factors for chronic liver disease such as presence of diabetesand obesity (the BARD score), a negative predictive value of greater than95%, to rule out significant liver scarring in NAFLD can be achieved.
Routine reporting of AST/ALT ratio would improve the clinical utility of the liverprofile without added cost.
Value as a Diagnostic test – perhaps we should be adding more?
Response to Stuart Smellie Article: David J Harman, Guruprasad Padur Aithal
![Page 26: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Development of a decision support tool for primary care management of patients with abnormal liver function tests without clinically apparent liver disease:a record-linkage population cohort study and decision analysis (ALFIE). Authors: Donnan PT, McLernon D, Dillon JF, Ryder S, Roderick P, Sullivan F, Rosenberg W
Journal: Health Technology Assessment Volume: 13 Issue: 25 Publication date: May 2009
![Page 27: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
The most striking observations of this study are that:(1) liver disease is not common in those with ALFTs over a
median follow-up time of 3.7 years;
(2) GGT shows highest sensitivity for liver disease above otherLFTs and is a good predictor of liver disease and liver mortalityafter adjustment for the bias of selective testing;
(3) ALFTs are predictive of death from non-hepatic causes(particularly albumin); and
(4) the rise in the number of LFTs requested does not alter theprevalence of abnormal tests.
![Page 28: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
![Page 29: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
ACB Suggestion
![Page 30: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Harmonisation• Time to ask what should we be doing?
• Reduce cost and confusion
• Important as we have more electronic requesting and e-records
• Is test for screening or monitoring
• Reflex testing?
• We need to know more about the utility of these basic tests!
![Page 31: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
The Ultimate Harmonisation!
Routine Chemistry Profile
![Page 32: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Harmonisation to Disinvestment
![Page 33: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Positive diagnoses from different index panels.
Lilford R J et al. BMJ Open 2013;3:e003099
©2013 by British Medical Journal Publishing Group
![Page 34: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
The effect of increasing the threshold of abnormality for four analytes.
Lilford R J et al. BMJ Open 2013;3:e003099
©2013 by British Medical Journal Publishing Group
![Page 35: Harmonisation of Laboratory Profiles](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022012802/61bd183361276e740b0f4aeb/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Liver enzymes don’t assess the degree of liverinjury nor do they predict clinical outcomes.
Lack of correlation of elevated liver enzymeswith the degree of liver injury or loss of function
None of the validated prognostic models used inclinical decision making such as Child-Pughscore, King’s College Criteria, Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) or UK End Stage LiverDisease (UKELD) include liver enzymes as theircomponents.