Inicio Blog Página 52

How labs should conduct high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays

0

Laboratory professionals and clinicians seeking to use high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays to diagnose acute myocardial infarction should power the 99th percentile upper-reference limit “for each sex and use a minimum of 300 males and 300 females,” writes Yader Sandoval of Hennepin County Medical Center/Abbott Northwestern Hospital. Sandoval also emphasizes the importance of understanding the absence of a universal delta cTn value for hs-assays. Laboratory medicine professionals in the US should begin educating clinicians on hs-cTn assays in preparation for FDA clearance, Sandoval writes.

Implementing High Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin Assays

High-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays promise better diagnostic accuracy for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), allowing earlier and more effective treatment for patients. This is why it is essential that laboratory medicine professionals and clinicians understand the performance of these tests and how to use them. With this challenge in mind, an expert group of laboratorians, emergency medicine clinicians, and cardiologists worked for more than 2 years on hs-cTn education materials, following-up on a mini-review that tackled the question, how does an assay become designated high-sensitivity (1)? This group, all members of the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) Task Force on Clinical Applications of Cardiac Bio-Markers, also collaborated with representatives from in vitro diagnostics companies who have expertise in hs-cTn troponin immunoassays.

In late 2014, the task force pub­lished evidence-based consensus findings on hs-cTn assays and how to implement them into clinical practice and research (2). These educational guidelines focus on two central issues—the 99th percentile upper-reference limit (URL), and calculating serial change values (delta cTn) in accord with the Third Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction (3). This document is a global collaboration and reflects a balanced perspective on hs-cTn assays from both clinical and laboratory viewpoints. The task force believed that without guidance on the how and why of implementing hs-assays into practice, the waters would continue to be choppy, the scientific and medical literature would not be consistent, and it would be difficult to appropriately compare and contrast published science on diagnostic or risk outcomes-assessment studies.

The task force’s top priority has been addressing the potential for inconsistent use of the analytical characteristics of hs-cTn assays, as the field has been without definitive consensus (4). The task force document is assay-blind to whether cTnI or cTnT is measured for patient care, but proposes clear operational recommendations. Unfortunately, U.S.-based laboratories cannot put these recommendations into practice, as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not yet cleared hs-cTn assays for clinical use.

Clarity on the 99th Percentile

The 99th percentile URL has long been recognized in clinical practice guidelines as a key component of diagnosing AMI (3). Importantly, this value is determined from a normal reference population, yet no consensus recommendations had been made on how normality studies should be performed by either investigators or industry in the era of hs-cTn assays (5). The task force document now provides definitive guidance: the 99th percentile should be powered for each sex and use a minimum of 300 males and 300 females. Because men have higher values than women, it is very important to determine sex-specific cutoffs.

From a clinical perspective, the relevance of sex-specific cutoff relates to the under-diagnosis of AMI in women. Questions have arisen as to whether this under-diagnosis is being driven by the use of single, overall 99th percentiles (as currently recommended for use with the hs-cTnT assay), rather than sex-specific cutoffs, as is the case with hs-cTnI assays (6). A recent prospective cohort study examined this issue and concluded that an hs-cTnI assay with sex-specific diagnostic thresholds could double the diagnosis of AMI in women, yet whether the implementation of such thresholds might impact outcomes and sex inequalities remains to be clarified (6).

The IFCC document also provides clear recommendations on what constitutes an hs-cTn assay. These assays should have an analytical precision (coefficient of variation, CV) of ≤10% for each sex-derived 99th percentile and should measure cTn above the limit of detection (LoD) in ≥50% of healthy individuals. This is important for clinicians and laboratorians alike, as assays could be branded or marketed as high-sensitivity­ without meeting IFCC task force recommendations.

Table 1 lists hs-cTn assays currently being proposed by manufacturers for clinical and/or research use. Assay characteristics should be carefully interpreted to determine whether that particular test indeed qualifies as hs. Currently, cTn assays with a %CV >10% but ≤20% at the 99th percentile are deemed clinically usable and designated as contemporary assays (3). As hs-cTn assays are implemented globally, it is relevant to highlight that a fundamental aspect of these assays is their excellent analytical precision at lower concentrations around the assay’s LoD.

Acute Versus Chronic Myocardial Injury

The second major issue the task force took on was how to calculate the delta or serial cTn change value. This helps differentiate acute from chronic myocardial injury (7). Using a delta cTn value is critically important to improving the diagnostic specificity for AMI versus elevated levels due to a chronic non-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) injury that might be related to structural heart disease. The task force highlighted numerous issues about delta cTn, including problems related to the gold standard diagnosis of AMI, spontaneous variation and timing of serial cTn for ruling in and ruling out MI, and the heterogeneity of cTn assay methods that impact delta change calculations.

It is critical for both laboratorians and clinicians to understand that there is no universal delta cTn value for all hs-assays. Manufacturers or clinical studies need to determine a delta value for each hs-cTnI and hs-cTnT assay, and these values are not interchangeable. As a result, one potential problem will be the understanding that the delta value will depend on the time interval used to perform the calculation. For example, using the baseline specimen drawn at presentation as 0 hours, the delta value could differ between using a second sample drawn at 1 hour, 2 hours, or 3 hours, and compared to the first 0 hour sample. For hs-assays the literature supports determining deltas based on absolute concentration changes and not percentage changes, which were initially shown to be useful for contemporary, less analytically sensitive assays.

Laboratory medicine professionals must prepare to educate clinicians on this point, emphasizing that one delta value does not fit all assays, that serial change delta values are assay-dependent­, and that the utility of hs-cTn is related to the onset of ischemic symptoms and the timing of presentation. Another concern is the great variability in the timing of cTn orders—both within hospitals by different providers as well as between different hospitals. For example, physician A at hospital X might order cTn at 0, 4, and 8 hours without a fixed preset order system, whereas physician B at hospital Y might have to follow a pre-designed hospital-wide order set of 0, 3, and 6 hours.

From a laboratory perspective, research has found that more than 40% of cTn testing using contemporary assays might be inappropriate, both in patients with and without clinical symptoms of ACS (9,10). The take-home message is that both clinical and research studies need to pay close attention to the details, including the timing of specimen collection, the timing of patient presentation related to symptom onset when developing delta values, comparing one assay to another, and how the assays are used in clinical practice. It is fundamental to embrace the concept that a rise or fall in cTn relates to capturing the window of time after an acute cardiac event—and consequently, in late presenters, a cTn plateau might be noted across serial cTn measurements. Confounding the general principle of delta change value in ruling in or ruling out AMI, the absence of a clear delta does not exclude the possibility of AMI in late presenters.

For clinicians using cTn on a regular basis, it is fundamental to understand the clinical context of a cTn measurement. In order to appropriately interpret results, clinicians must assess each patient’s pre-test probability for AMI and integrate the patient’s clinical circumstance in which the cTn measurements are being performed. cTn increases should be classified as either acute or chronic, the latter typically involving patients with chronic congestive failure and renal failure. Furthermore, most clinically encountered cTn increases will be categorized as myocardial injury (which may be ischemic or non-ischemic in nature), type 1 MI or type 2 MI (11). Another key clinical message is that not all cTn increases are due to AMI.

Independent, but closely associated with the work of the task force, was a meeting between FDA and several opinion leaders in the cTn biomarker field, to discuss concerns about the heterogeneity of analytical and clinical protocols used in studies for clearance of hs-cTn assays (12). The opinion leaders advocated that FDA use standardized study protocols, because, having worked with industry in clinical studies used to submit their hs-cTn assays for 510(k) clearance, they knew about the variability between the specific protocols used by different companies in their studies. The group also recommended development of a white paper that could be given to all companies as a starting point for their analytical and clinical evaluations. This would not only reduce complexity and permit better comparisons among different hs-cTn assay methods, but also provide suggestions to achieve these goals. Although FDA seemed supportive of the evidence-based analytical and clinical cTn literature presented at the meeting, the agency chose not to endorse the published paper.

Conclusion

The task force document provides important insights and recommendations for hs-cTn assays (see Table 2). The educational recommendations are fundamental, as they provide a balanced multi­disciplinary consensus as we move forward towards global use of hs-cTn assays. Endorsement of these ideas, which we know will evolve over time, is important for future studies defining normality and 99th percentiles. They will also enhance the quality of diagnostic accuracy and outcomes assessment investigations with hs-cTn assays, including delta serial change values to improve specificity for ruling out AMI.

It is not too early for laboratory medicine professionals in the U.S. to start the educational process with their clinical colleagues by sharing key findings in the growing body of literature on using hs-cTn assays. They should get a head start so that when FDA clears hs-cTn assays, there will not be a delay in implementation. If these recommendations are implemented globally for clinical patient care and research, and published with uniformity, the task force will have been successful in easing the challenge of change and offering transparency as we navigate a shift towards improved use of cTn. Read the literature and prepare your providers, as hs-cTn assays are coming soon to a lab near you.

Author: Fred Apple, PhD and Yader Sandoval, MD

Fred Apple, PhD, is the medical director of clinical laboratories at Hennepin County Medical Center and professor of laboratory medicine at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis. He is a member of the IFCC Task Force on Clinical Applications of Cardiac Bio-Markers. +Email: apple004@umn.edu

Yader Sandoval, MD, is the chief cardiology fellow at Hennepin County Medical Center/Abbott Northwestern Hospital in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Disclosure: Fred Apple, PhD, has received grants or research support from Siemens, Roche, Abbott, Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Alere, Nanomix, and Trinity Biotech; consultant fees from Phillips Healthcare Incubator; and honoraria from Abbott and Roche.

References

  1. Apple FS, Collinson PO, IFCC Task Force on Clinical Applications of Cardiac Biomarkers. Analytical characteristics of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays. Clin Chem 2012;58: 54–61.
  2. Apple FS, Jaffe AS, Collinson P, et al. on behalf of the IFCC Task Force on Clinical Applications of Cardiac Bio-Markers. IFCC educational materials on selected analytical and clinical applications of high-sensitivity­ cardiac troponin assays. Clin Biochem 2015;48:201–23.
  3. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, et al., the writing group on behalf of the Joint ESC/ACCF/AHA/WHF Task Force for the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60:1581–98.
  4. Korley FK, Jaffe AS. Preparing the United States for the high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:1753–8.
  5. Sandoval Y, Apple FS. The global need to define normality: The 99th percentile value of cardiac troponin. Clin Chem 2014;60:455–62.
  6. Shah A, Griffiths M, Lee KK, et al. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin and the under diagnosis of myocardial infarction in women. Brit Med J 2015;350:7873–80.
  7. Jaffe AS, Moeckel M, Giannitsis E, Huber K, Mair J, Mueller C, et al. In search for the Holy Grail: Suggestions for studies to define delta changes to diagnose or exclude acute myocardial infarction: A position paper from the study group on biomarkers of the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovas Care 2014;3:313–6.
  8.  Shah ASV, Anand A, Sandoval Y, et al. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin at presentation in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome: A cohort study. Lancet 2015; doi.org/10.1016/S1040-6736(15)00391-8.
  9. Fraga OR, Sandoval Y, Love SA, et al. Cardiac troponin testing is overused after rule-in or rule-out of myocardial infarction. Clin Chem 2015;61:436–7.
  10. Love SA, McKinney ZJ, Sandoval Y, et al. Electronic health record-based performance improvement project to document and reduce excessive cardiac troponin testing. Clin Chem 2015;61:498–504.
  11. Sandoval Y, Smith SW, Apple FS. Supply/demand type 2 myocardial infarction: Should we be paying more attention? J Amer Coll Card 2014; 63:2079–87.
  12. Apple FS, Hollander J, Wu AHB, et al. Improving the 510k FDA process for cardiac troponin assays: In search of common ground. Clin Chem 2014:60:1273–5.

Date: DEC.1.2015

Source: AACC’sClinical Laboratory News

Listado de emisiones anteriores

No se encontraron entradas.

Interview: Dr. Alessio Fasano (USA)

0
World-renowned pediatric gastroenterologist, research scientist and entreprenuer Alessio Fasano, M.D., heads the Center for Celiac Research at MassGeneral Hospital for Children (MGHfC) in Boston, Massachusetts. Founded in 1996, the Center offers state-of-the art research, clinical expertise, teaching and advocacy for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of gluten-related disorders, including celiac disease, gluten sensitivity and wheat allergy, for patients of all ages.

Trained in Naples, Italy, as a pediatric gastroenterologist, Dr. Fasano was recruited to the University of Maryland School of Medicine in 1993 and founded its Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition. Puzzled by the absence of children exhibiting symptoms of celiac disease in the clinic, he resolved to uncover the mystery of missing American “celiacs.” His perseverance in the face of skepticism about celiac disease in the U.S. eventually led to his publication of the groundbreaking study in 2003 that established the rate of the autoimmune disorder at one in 133 Americans.

His subsequent work includes numerous diagnostic and research breakthroughs, including the discovery of the ancient molecule “zonulin,” which regulates the impermeability of the intestine also known as “leaky gut.” Dr. Fasano’s research has linked an overproduction of zonulin to the pathogenesis of a series of autoimmune diseases, including type 1 diabetes, celiac disease and multiple sclerosis.

Widely sought after by national and international media, Dr. Fasano has been featured in hundreds of interviews including outlets such as The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal; National Public Radio; CNN; Bloomberg News; USA Today; Los Angeles Times; The Huffington Post, “Good Morning America”; The Globe and Mail; VOGUE; and numerous health-related websites and magazines. Dr. Fasano is a skilled gluten-free chef and a connoisseur of fine wines and Italian luxury automobiles.

Dr. Fasano is division chief of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition at MGHfC. He also heads the Mucosal Immunology and Biology Research Center and is associate chief for Basic, Clinical and Translational Research for the Department of Pediatrics at MGHf C. He is a Visiting Professor of Pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. He has authored hundreds of academic articles and book chapters.

Interview: James Januzzi (USA)

0

Dr. James Januzzi is a cardiologist in Boston, Massachusetts and is affiliated with Massachusetts General Hospital. He received his medical degree from New York Medical College and has been in practice for more than 20 years. Dr. Januzzi accepts several types of health insurance, listed below. He is one of 162 doctors at Massachusetts General Hospital who specialize in Cardiovascular Disease. He also speaks multiple languages, including Italian.

November 2015 Program

0
  • James Januzzi (USA), specialist in Cardiology at Massachusetts General Hospital, about research into new cardiac biomarkers.
  • Alessio Fasano (USA), Director of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition at the General Hospital of Massachusetts, about celiac disease.
  • Agenda.
  • News and events about clinical chemistry.

 

EFLM e-seminar: Management of the quality in the preanalytical phase

0
The preanalytical phase is the main contributor to diagnostic errors. Modifying staff behaviour to conform to venous specimen collection practice guidelines and other recommended practices has proved to be a difficult task. Professor Kjell Grankvist will talk about the “Management of the quality in the preanalytical phase” at the next EFLM e-seminar.
Professor Grankvist is Professor of Clinical Chemistry and Director of the Department of Biobank Research at Umeå University. He is also a member of the EFLM Working Group on Preanalytical phase.
Tuesday, November 10, 2015 – 6:00 PM – 7:00 PM (Central European Time – Prague)
The participation is free of charge – The number of attendees is limited

HbA1c and Estimated Average Glucose (eAG)

0

Many patients with diabetes mellitus now perform self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in the home setting, and understanding the relationship between HbA1c and glucose can be useful in setting goals for day-to-day testing.

HbA1c: A “Weighted” Average

Many studies have shown that HbA1c is an index of average glucose (AG) over the preceding weeks-to-months. Erythrocyte (red blood cell) life-span averages about 120 days. The level of HbA1c at any point in time is contributed to by all circulating erythrocytes, from the oldest (120 days old) to the youngest. However, HbA1c is a “weighted” average of blood glucose levels during the preceding 120 days, meaning that glucose levels in the preceding 30 days contribute substantially more to the level of HbA1c than do glucose levels 90-120 days earlier. This explains why the level of HbA1c can increase or decrease relatively quickly with large changes in glucose; it does not take 120 days to detect a clinically meaningful change in HbA1c following a clinically significant change in AG.

How does HbA1c relate to average glucose (AG)?

In the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial or DCCT (New Engl J Med 1993;329:977-986) study of patients with Type 1 diabetes, quarterly HbA1c determinations were the principal measure of glycemic control; study subjects also performed quarterly 24-hour, 7-point capillary-blood glucose profiles. Blood specimens were obtained by subjects in the home setting, pre-meal, 90 minutes post-meal, and at bed-time. In an analysis of the DCCT glucose profile data (Diabetes Care 25:275-278, 2002), mean HbA1c and AG were calculated for each study subject (n= 1439). Results showed a linear relationship between HbA1c and AG (AG(mg/dL) = ( 35.6 x HbA1c ) – 77.3), with a Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of 0.82.

Table 1

HbA1c (%)

eAG (mg/dL)

eAG (mmol/l)

5

97

5.4

6

126

7.0

7

154

8.6

8

183

10.2

9

212

11.8

10

240

13.4

11

269

14.9

12

298

16.5

Data from the A1c-Derived Average Glucose (ADAG) Study:

A more recent study (2006-2008) sponsored by the ADA, EASD and IDF was designed to better define the mathematical relationship between HbA1c and AG.  The study included 507 subjects with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes and without diabetes from 10 international centers.  Estimated AG (eAG) was calculated by combining weighted results from at least 2 days of continuous glucose monitoring performed four times, with seven-point daily self-monitoring of capillary glucose performed at least 3 days per week. The relationship between eAG and HbA1c based on linear regression analysis was:eAG(mg/dl)= (28.7*HbA1c)-46.7, r2=0.84 (Diabetes Care 2008;31:1-6). Table 1 depicts this relationship.

More information about eAG, including a calculator to covert eAG to HbA1c and vice-versa, can be found here.

The regression equation from the ADAG study provides lower eAG values compared with the widely used equation derived from the DCCT, and the scatter around the regression is less wide.  The proposed explanation for the difference is in the frequency of glucose measurements used to calculate AG, with the ADAG estimate providing a more complete and representative measure of average glucose.

How does Fasting Glucose Relate to HbA1c?

Further analyses of the DCCT data showed that among single time-point measurements, post-lunch and bedtime glucose showed relationships to HbA1c that were the most similar to full 7-point profile glucose. Fasting glucose correlated less well and results showed that with increasing HbA1c, fasting glucose progressively underestimated the level of HbA1c and/or AG calculated from the 7-point profile.

What Does All of This Mean?

First, there is a very predictable relationship between HbA1c and AG. Understanding this relationship can help patients with diabetes and their health-care providers set day-to-day targets for AG based on HbA1c goals (e.g. American Diabetes Association recommendations). Second, fasting glucose should be used with caution as a surrogate measure of AG. Finally, it is important to remember that HbA1c is a weighted average of glucose levels during the preceding 4 months. Unless the patient’s glucose levels are very stable month after month, quarterly measurement is needed to insure that a patient’s glycemic control remains within the target range.

Source: National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program

A new issue of CCLM is available online! – November 2015

0

CCLM is published on a monthly basis and is the most relevant Journal on Clinical Chemistry in Europe; it is a valuable and updated source of knowledge for the professionals in the field, well recognized all over the world.  

Volume 53, Issue 12 (November 2015)

Click here to see the future titles of Clin Chem Lab Med

Clinical Diagnostics and Research: Free online Virtual Event

0

Join us for our 6th annual Clinical Diagnostics & Research online conference.

The theme of this conference is a range of medical and clinical and researchtopics such as Personalized Healthcare, Pathology, Oncology, Infectious Disease, Laboratory Testing, Cardiology, Diabetes, Point of Care, Molecular Diagnostics, Hematology, Automation, Nutrition, Vitamin D, Allergy, Clinical Research, Mass Spectrometry, and much more.

Featured Speakers

  • Linda Thienpont, PhD, PHARM, Clinical Chemist. Professor of Analytical Chemistry, Statistics and Quality Control, Method Development and Validation; Director of the Laboratory for Analytical Chemistry ID-MS Reference Laboratory, University of Ghent, Belgium
  • Kevin J Martin, MD, MB, BCh, FASN. Professor of Internal Medicine, Director of the Division of Nephrology, Saint Louis University School of Medicine
  • Stuart M Sprague, DO, FACP, FASN, FNK. Chief of the Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, and Director of Nephrology Research at NorthShore University HealthSystem and Clinical Professor of Medicine at the University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine
  • Damien Gruson, PhD, Pharmacist, Specialist in Laboratory Medicine. Professor, Associated Laboratory Director, Endocrine Biology, St-Luc University Hospital, Researcher, Endocrinolgy Diabetes and Nutrition, Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium
  • Edward Watson Hook, III, MD. Professor of Medicine/Epidemiology/Microbiology, Director, Division of Infectious Diseases, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases
  • Kevin McCann, BS. Application Scientist, Agilent Technologies
  • Michael R Olin – Assistant Professor, Department of Pediatrics, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Minnesota
  • Matthew Keyser, MS. Senior Manager, NGS Applications, DNASTAR
  • Katherine (Katie) Serrano. Deputy Director, Division of Chemistry and Toxicology Devices, Office of In Vitro Diagnostics and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health
  • Michael Laposata, MD, PhD. Chairman of Pathology, University of Texas Medical Branch
  • Julie R Taylor, PhD, MS. Project Lead for the Clinical Laboratory Integration into Health Care Collaboration (CLIHC), Division of Laboratory Programs, Standards, and Services Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services Office of Public Health Scientific Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • Christina (Tina) Lockwood, PhD, DABCC, FACB. Associate Director, Genetics and Solid Tumor Diagnostics Laboratory, Assistant Professor, Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Washington
  • Allison Chambliss, PhD – Clinical Chemistry Fellow, Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Wieslaw Furmaga, MD. Associate Professor, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
  • Ben Howden, PhD. Professor, Head of Laboratory, Microbiology and Immunology, Director, Microbiological Diagnostic Unit, University of Melbourne
  • Brian R Jackson. Vice President, Chief Medical Informatics Officer, ARUP
  • Howard Morris, PhD, FAACB, FFSc(RCPA). Professor of Endocrine Bone Research Laboratory, Univ of South Australia
  • Amy K Saenger, PhD, DABCC, FACB. Cardiac Sr. Scientific Affairs Manager, Roche Diagnostics
  • Ravinder Singh, PhD. Director, Endocrine Laboratory, Mayo Clinic
  • David R Sullivan, MBBS, FRACP, FRCPA. Clinical Associate Professor, Dept of Biochemistry, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital
  • Ping Wang, PhD, DABCC, FACB. Director of Clinical Chemistry, Houston Methodist Hospital, Associate Professor, Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical Colleges

Agenda

More Information: Labroots

Forthcoming congresses and courses under IFCC auspices – October 2015

0

Calendar of IFCC Congresses/Conferences and Regional Federation’s Congresses

Nov 16 – 17, 2015 IFCC POCT International Symposium Cancun, MX
Dec 02 – 03, 2015 Turning Science into Caring – 8th Annual Asia Pacific & Japan Scientific Symposium The Westin Resort Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia
Dec 04 – 06, 2015 ArabMedLab 2015 – 14th Arab Congress of Clinical Biology (AFCB) Khartoum, SD
Nov 26 – 29, 2016 14th Asia-Pacific Federation for Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine Congress Taipei, TW
Jun 11 – 15, 2017 IFCC-EFLM EuroMedLab 2017 Athens, GR
Sep 17 – 22, 2017 XXIII COLABLIOCLI Congress 2017 and XI Uruguayan Congress of Clinical Biochemistry Punta del Este, UY
Oct 20 – 22, 2017 XIV International Congress of Pediatric Laboratory Medicine Durban, ZA
Oct 22 – 25, 2017 XXIII IFCC WorldLab 2017 Durban, ZA
May 24 – 28, 2020 XXIV IFCC WorldLab 2020 Seoul Seoul, KR

 Calendar of events with IFCC auspices

Oct 16 – 23, 2015 Biochemical and Molecular Basis of Multifactorial Diseases– Cancer Moron, AR
Oct 22 – 22, 2015 International Conference on Laboratory Medicine ” Risk Factors and Personalized Medicine” Padova, IT
Oct 22 – 24, 2015 X Uruguayan Congress of Clinical Biochemistry Montevideo, UY
Oct 24 – 25, 2015 15Th EFLM Continuing Postgraduate Course in Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Zagreb, HR
Oct 24 – 25, 2015 High Quality Control Training Course Guanajuato, MX
Nov 03 – 06, 2015 XXVII National Biochemistry Congress Antalya, TR
Nov 14 – 15, 2015 High Quality Control Training Course Mexico City, MX
Nov 16 – 30, 2015 1°Congreso Virtual de Bioquimica clinica – VirtuaLAB Internet
Nov 18 – 21, 2015 XXVIII World Congress of the World Association of Societies of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (WASPaLM) Cancun, MX
Nov 25 – 28, 2015 ACBICON 2015 Chandigarh, IN
Nov 25 – 27, 2015 XVIII Regular Congress Bolivian Society of Clinical Biochemistry Oruro, BO
Nov 26 – 29, 2015 XVII National Congress of clinical laboratory professionals Punta Cana, DO
Nov 27 – 27, 2015 9th International Scientific Meeting “Structuring EQAS for Meeting Metrological Criteria: ready for prime time” Milano, IT
Dec 04 – 04, 2015 6th International Conference on Quality of Medical Laboratories Ljubljana, SI
Feb 11 – 12, 2016 Labquality Days – Nordic Congress on Quality in Laboratory Medicine Helsinki, FI
Mar 09 – 11, 2016 IX Nathional Congress of Clinical Pathology, CONAPAC 2016 Havana, CU
Mar 24 – 25, 2016 5th International Conference on Vitamin D Deficiency and its Clinical Implications Abu Dhabi, UAE
May 12 – 14, 2016 XIII Baltic Congress of Laboratory Medicine Tartu, EE
Sep 21 – 24, 2016 4th Joint EFLM-UEMS Congress “Laboratory Medicine at the Clinical Interface” Warsaw, PL

 

Agenda

       

Radio El Microscopio

Ze Xiong

Últimas notas publicadas