Inter‐laboratory validation of a harmonized PNH flow cytometry assay

Abstract

Background: A network comprising 11 laboratories aimed to consolidate PNH testing by developing and validating an assay guided by previous guidelines and studies. Network analyses of >20 native samples yielded key findings that were used to create and reshape the final protocol.Methods: Twenty-seven native samples were distributed to all participating laboratories for blind testing, local analysis, and subsequent re-analysis by a central laboratory. Inter-laboratory clone size precision (coefficient of variation [CV]) was monitored for each sample, and the findings used to refine the test protocol. Linearity and precision tests were performed, assay limits of blank and detection were calculated, and limits of quantification were determined.Results: When using the final protocol, enumeration of cells with a PNH phenotype by all participating laboratories was comparable, with no clinically significant discrepancies or false-positive or false-negative results reported. Of note, the biological characteristics of the sample affected precision. For example, CVs were higher when PNH and normal cells showed contiguous expression of GPI-linked antigens. A red cell gating strategy that eliminated non-specific type II PNH phenotypic events was devised, enabling reliable reporting of events in the type II red cell gate. The final protocol provided an assay with a Limit of Quantification of 0.01% for neutrophils and red cells, and 0.1% for monocytes.Conclusions: We describe a robust network-validated PNH assay that may aid other laboratories to set up and validate high resolution PNH analysis.

The flow cytometry myeloid progenitor count: A reproducible parameter for diagnosis and prognosis of myelodysplastic syndromes

“…Harmonization strategies can be used to attain good interoperator concordance for a variety of FC enumeration assays (Gratama et al, 1998; Lhermitte et al, 2020; Payne et al, 2018; Rawstron et al, 2013) and as reviewed by Kalina (2020). Indeed, our own study design benefitted from previous work on defining CD34+ bone marrow cells by Satoh et al (2008) and Font et al (2018).…”

Detection of CAR‐T19 cells in peripheral blood and cerebrospinal fluid: An assay applicable to routine diagnostic laboratories

“…The LOB was calculated as described previously (Armbruster & Pry, 2008;Payne et al, 2018) and was determined for two types of negative (blank) samples: (Demaret et al, 2020) non-specific binding to control protein by T-cells in PB from patients recently transfused with CAR-T19 (16 samples from nine patients between day 1-30 posttransfusion; seven axi-cel; two tisa-cel), and (Grupp et al, 2013) nonspecific binding to sCD19F by T-cells in PB from patients before CAR-T19 treatment (n = 10).…”