Standardisation and Reporting of HbA1cMar 26, 2009  · Lessons Learned It is an Illusion to think...

Standardisation and Reporting of HbA1c

Dr. Cas Weykamp, IFCC Network Coordinator, Queen Beatrix Hospital, Winterswijk, The NetherlandsLeuven, 26 March 2009

Many Unspecific Methods

NGSP – JDS - MonoS

IFCC

History of HbA1c Numbers

Chaos

NationalHarmonisation

GlobalStandardisation

Wild West

DesignatedComparison Method

Method of HigherMetrological Order

Situation Reference System

Many Unspecific Methods

NGSP – JDS - MonoS

IFCC

Analyt

ical

Accep

tance

Clinical

Acceptance

Does the World love The IFCC?

?

??????………….in General

Fahrenheit CelciusFranc EuroMiles KilometersPints* Litersmg/dL µmol/L…………. ………….

* Except Beer

??????………….for HbA1c

Fahrenheit CelciusFranc EuroMiles KilometersPints Litersmg/dL µmol/LNGSP Numbers IFCC Numbers

That is the Question!

Debate onNumbers

Debate on HbA1c Numbers

Purists Conservatives Strategists

??

?

Debate on HbA1c Numbers

Purists Conservatives Strategists

?

Implement thenew IFCC numbers

We have a new method: use it!

?

Debate on HbA1c Numbers

Purists Conservatives Strategists

??

Keep the oldDCCT numbers

We are used to it: never change a winning team!

Consensus Statement!

Purists Conservatives Strategists

IFCC = International Federation Clinical ChemistryIDF = International Diabetes FederationEASD = European Association Study of DiabetesADA = American Diabetes Association

Milan, 4 May 2007

? ?

1. We agree that the HbA1c results should be standardized worldwide,including the reference system and results reporting

2. We agree that the IFCC reference system for HbA1c representsthe only valid anchor to implement standardisation of the measurement

3. We agree that the HbA1c assay results be reported worldwide inIFCC units (mmol/mol) and derived NGSP units (%), using theIFCC-NGSP master equation

4. We agree that if the ongoing “average plasma glucose study” fulfillsits a priori specified criteria, an HbA1c-derived average plasma glucose(APG) value should also be reported as an interpretation of the HbA1c result

5. We recommend that all clinical guidelines be expressed in IFCC units,derived NGSP units, and APG

6. We agree that these recommendations should be implementedglobally as soon as possible

1. HbA1c Standardised Worldwide

2. IFCC is the Anchor

3. HbA1c reported IFCC and NGSP

4. HbA1c also reported eAG

5. IFCC, NGSP, eAG in Guidelines

6. Implementation Soon

Summary Consensus Statement

Reflection on…….

…..Implications Consensus Statement

1. HbA1c Standardised Worldwide

2. IFCC is the Anchor

3. HbA1c reported IFCC and NGSP

4. HbA1c also reported eAG

5. IFCC, NGSP, eAG in Guidelines

6. Implementation Soon

Essention Consensus Statement

Mono-S JDS/JSCC NGSP IFCC Sweden Japan US

% % % mmol/mol

7.2 7.6 8.0 64

6.1 6.6 7.0 53

5.0 5.6 6.0 42

2.9 3.6 4.0 20

HbA1c DictionaryAverage PlasmaGlucose (APG)*HbA1c

mmol/L mg/dL

10.2 183

8.6 154

7.0 126

3.8 69

Change Therapy

Target Therapy

Upper Normal

Lower Normal

Interpretation

Normal Rangeand

Action Limits

* From provisional results ADAG StudyC. Weykamp

Patient Chart

Jan 06 April 06 July06 Oct06 Jan07 Apr07 Jul07 Oct07

eAG*mmol/L(mg/dL)

10.2(183)

.

8.6(154)

7.0(126)

.

HbA1cmmol/mol(% NGSP)

64(8.0%)

.

53(7.0%)

.

42(6.0%)

.

Change Therapy

Target Therapy

Upper Normal

C. Weykamp *From Provisional Data ADAG Study

Laboratory Report

Glucose 5.9 mmol/LNa 142 mmol/LK 4.6 mmol/LHbA1c 42 mmol/mol (IFCC Units)

6.0 % (NGSP units)7.0 mmol/L (Average Plasma Glucose)

Urea 5.6 mmol/LCreatinine 83 μmol/LCa 2.1 mmol/L

Laboratory Report

Glucose 5.9 mmol/LNa 142 mmol/LK 4.6 mmol/L

HbA1c 42 mmol/mol (IFCC Units)6.0 % (NGSP units)7.0 mmol/L (Average Plasma Glucose)

Urea 5.6 mmol/LCreatinine 83 μmol/LCa 2.1 mmol/L

One Analyte: Three Numbers

Implementatation: Many parties Involved

Consensus Statement

Clinical Chemist

PatientDiabetologists

Manufacturer EQAS OrganizerIFCC Calibrators

Kit Calibrators

Value Assingment

Proficiency Test

IFCCADAEASDIDF

One Analyte – Three Numbers !?

* This is whatWe want

ClinicalChemist

One Analyte Three Numbers!?

* ScientificallySound?

* Technically* Possible?

* Do my* Physicians* want this?

Physicians

One Analyte – Three Numbers !?

* Not too FastOur OpinionIs…….

Patients

One Analyte – One Number !?

* KnowMy Number….

…..WhatNumber?

Manufacturer

One Analyte – Three Numbers !?

Give Us Time

- Traceable 31 Dec 2009

- IFCC and NGSP“1-1-1-1”

1 January 2011

- eAG not businessAnalytical Instruments(but lab information systemlike eGFR)

Lessons Learned

It is an Illusion to think that The Consensus Statement will be uniformly implemented Worldwide: the views in the respective countries are too different

Implementation is not an issue for a single group but mustbe a concerted action of all parties involved (diabetologists,clinical chemists, patients, manufacturers, EQA organisers)

As global implementation is not achieveable, try at least uniform implementation at the national level

Implementation National Level

•National Committee of stakeholders

•Define: final situationtransition perioddeadlines

•Consensus and Committment of Stakeholders

•Tasks of respective Stakeholders

•(Communication) Plan

Global standardization of HbA1c- results reporting -

Country IFCC NGSP eAG other timelinenumbers numbers (starting from)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

USA no yes yes nd 2008 August

Sweden yes yes yes Swedish (?)numbers

Japan yes no no JDS (?)numbers

UK yes yes no 2009 April 1st

(dual reportingup to 31 March 2011)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Other countries where discussion and decisions are expected: The Netherlands, Italy, ...

Slide from Prof. Andrea Mosca

One Analyte – Three Numbers !?

Belgium

* Make a Decision

Thank you for your Attention