OBJECTIVE: There have been needs to improve the sensitivity of liquid biopsy. This report aims to report the analytical and clinical validation of a next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) assay.
METHODS: Analytical validation was conducted in vitro by evaluating the limit of detection (LOD), precision, and specificity for various genomic aberrations. The real-world performance in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was assessed by comparing the results of AlphaLiquid100 to the tissue-based results.
RESULTS: The LODs with 30 ng input DNA were 0.11%, 0.11%, 0.06%, 0.21%, and 2.13 copies for detecting single nucleotide variants, insertions, deletions, fusions, and copy number alterations (CNA), respectively. Quantitatively, single nucleotide variants/insertions and deletions, fusions, and CNAs showed a good correlation (R2=0.91, 0.40, and 0.65; y=0.95, 1.06, and 1.19) to the manufacturer\'s values, and per-base specificities for all types of variants were near 100%. In real-world NSCLC (n=122), key actionable mutations in NSCLC were detected in 60.7% (74/122) with the ctDNA assay. Comparative analysis against the NGS-based tissue results for all key mutations showed positive percent agreement (PPA) of 85.3%. For individual genes, the PPA was as high as 95.7% for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations and 83.3% for ALK translocations. AlphaLiquid100 detected drug-sensitive EGFR mutation at a variant allele frequency as low as 0.02% and also identified an EGFR mutation in a case where tissue sample missed. Blood samples collected post-targeted therapies revealed additional acquired mutations.
CONCLUSIONS: The AlphaLiquid100 ctDNA assay demonstrates robust analytical validity, offering clinically important information for NSCLC patients.

The blood proteome, consisting of thousands of proteins engaged in various biological processes, acts as a valuable source of potential biomarkers for various medical applications. PROphet is a plasma proteomics-based test that serves as a decision-support tool for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, combining proteomic profiling using SomaScan technology and subsequent computational algorithm. PROphet was implemented as a laboratory developed test (LDT). Under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) and Commission on Office Laboratory Accreditation (COLA) regulations, prior to releasing patient test results, a clinical laboratory located in the United States employing an LDT must examine its performance characteristics with regard to analytical validity. This study describes the experimental and computational analytical validity of the PROphet test, as required by CLIA/COLA regulations. Experimental precision analysis displayed a median coefficient of variation (CV) of 3.9 % and 4.7 % for intra-plate and inter-plate examination, respectively, and the median accuracy rate between sites was 88 %. Computational precision exhibited a high accuracy rate, with 93 % of samples displaying complete concordance in results. A cross-platform comparison between SomaScan and other proteomics platforms yielded a median Spearman\'s rank correlation coefficient of 0.51, affirming the consistency and reliability of the SomaScan platform as used under the PROphet test. Our study presents a robust framework for evaluating the analytical validity of a platform that combines an experimental assay with subsequent computational algorithms. When applied to the PROphet test, strong analytical performance of the test was demonstrated.

UNASSIGNED: Gait and balance impairments are often present in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) and have a significant impact on quality of life and independence. Gold-standard quantitative tools for assessing gait and balance such as motion capture systems and force plates usually require complex technical setups. Wearable sensors, including those integrated into smartphones, offer a more frequent, convenient, and minimally burdensome assessment of functional disability in a home environment. We developed a novel smartphone sensor-based application (Floodlight) that is being used in multiple research and clinical contexts, but a complete validation of this technology is still lacking.
UNASSIGNED: This protocol describes an observational study designed to evaluate the analytical and clinical validity of Floodlight gait and balance tests. Approximately 100 PwMS and 35 healthy controls will perform multiple gait and balance tasks in both laboratory-based and real-world environments in order to explore the following properties: (a) concurrent validity of the Floodlight gait and balance tests against gold-standard assessments; (b) reliability of Floodlight digital measures derived under different controlled gait and balance conditions, and different on-body sensor locations; (c) ecological validity of the tests; and (d) construct validity compared with clinician- and patient-reported assessments.
UNASSIGNED: The Floodlight GaitLab study (ISRCTN15993728) represents a critical step in the technical validation of Floodlight technology to measure gait and balance in PwMS, and will also allow the development of new test designs and algorithms.

Measures of stepping volume and rate are common outputs from wearable devices, such as accelerometers. It has been proposed that biomedical technologies, including accelerometers and their algorithms, should undergo rigorous verification as well as analytical and clinical validation to demonstrate that they are fit for purpose. The aim of this study was to use the V3 framework to assess the analytical and clinical validity of a wrist-worn measurement system of stepping volume and rate, formed by the GENEActiv accelerometer and GENEAcount step counting algorithm. The analytical validity was assessed by measuring the level of agreement between the wrist-worn system and a thigh-worn system (activPAL), the reference measure. The clinical validity was assessed by establishing the prospective association between the changes in stepping volume and rate with changes in physical function (SPPB score). The agreement of the thigh-worn reference system and the wrist-worn system was excellent for total daily steps (CCC = 0.88, 95% CI 0.83-0.91) and moderate for walking steps and faster-paced walking steps (CCC = 0.61, 95% CI 0.53-0.68 and 0.55, 95% CI 0.46-0.64, respectively). A higher number of total steps and faster paced-walking steps was consistently associated with better physical function. After 24 months, an increase of 1000 daily faster-paced walking steps was associated with a clinically meaningful increase in physical function (0.53 SPPB score, 95% CI 0.32-0.74). We have validated a digital susceptibility/risk biomarker-pfSTEP-that identifies an associated risk of low physical function in community-dwelling older adults using a wrist-worn accelerometer and its accompanying open-source step counting algorithm.

A major evolution from purely clinical diagnoses to biomarker supported clinical diagnosing has been occurring over the past years in neurology. High-throughput methods, such as next-generation sequencing and mass spectrometry-based proteomics along with improved neuroimaging methods, are accelerating this development. This calls for a consensus framework that is broadly applicable and provides a spot-on overview of the clinical validity of novel biomarkers. We propose a harmonized terminology and a uniform concept that stratifies biomarkers according to clinical context of use and evidence levels, adapted from existing frameworks in oncology with a strong focus on (epi)genetic markers and treatment context. We demonstrate that this framework allows for a consistent assessment of clinical validity across disease entities and that sufficient evidence for many clinical applications of protein biomarkers is lacking. Our framework may help to identify promising biomarker candidates and classify their applications by clinical context, aiming for routine clinical use of (protein) biomarkers in neurology.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare Quidel\'s rapid antigen test Sofia SARS antigen Fluorescent Immunoassay (FIA) (Sofia) with the real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) test.
METHODS: Two samples were taken from each test subject-1 for testing with the Sofia test and 1 for testing with the rRT-PCR test. In total, swabs were taken from 146 subjects who presented symptoms of infection (group 1) and 672 subjects who were tested regardless of symptoms (group 2).
RESULTS: In group 1, the sensitivity of the antigen test was 90.0% and its specificity 97.5%. In group 2, however, the sensitivity of the antigen test was 81.4% and the specificity 98.9%. In addition to asymptomatic patients, false-negative results of rapid antigen tests also occurred in subjects with high threshold values (cycle threshold > 30).
CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the Sofia test meets the standards for diagnostic tests according to the criteria of the World Health Organization, as they show high sensitivity and specificity, and perhaps most importantly, a high negative predictive value (> 95%).

The most significant biomarkers that are included in the Alzheimer\'s disease (AD) research framework are amyloid-β plaques deposition, p-tau, t-tau, and neurodegeneration.Although cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers are included in the most recent AD research criteria, their use is increasing in the routine clinical practice and is applied also to the preclinical phases of AD, including mild cognitive impairment. The role of these biomarkers is still unclear concerning the preclinical stage of AD diagnosis, the CSF methodology, and the costs-benefits of the biomarkers\' tests. The controversies regarding the use of biomarkers in the clinical practice are related to the concepts of analytical validity, clinical validity, and clinical utility and to the question of whether they are able to diagnose AD without the support of AD clinical phenotypes.
The objective of the present work is to expose the strengths and weaknesses of the use of CSF biomarkers in the diagnosis of AD in a clinical context.
We used PubMed as main source for articles published and the final reference list was generated on the basis of relevance to the topics covered in this work.
The use of CSF biomarkers for AD diagnosis is certainly important but its indication in routine clinical practice, especially for prodromal conditions, needs to be regulated and also contextualized considering the variety of possible clinical AD phenotypes.
We suggest that the diagnosis of AD should be understood both as clinical and pathological.

OBJECTIVE: The nuclear proliferation marker Ki67 assayed by immunohistochemistry has multiple potential uses in breast cancer, but an unacceptable level of interlaboratory variability has hampered its clinical utility. The International Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group has undertaken a systematic programme to determine whether Ki67 measurement can be analytically validated and standardised among laboratories. This study addresses whether acceptable scoring reproducibility can be achieved on excision whole sections.
RESULTS: Adjacent sections from 30 primary ER+ breast cancers were centrally stained for Ki67 and sections were circulated among 23 pathologists in 12 countries. All pathologists scored Ki67 by two methods: (i) global: four fields of 100 tumour cells each were selected to reflect observed heterogeneity in nuclear staining; (ii) hot-spot: the field with highest apparent Ki67 index was selected and up to 500 cells scored. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the global method [confidence interval (CI) = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.799-0.93] marginally met the prespecified success criterion (lower 95% CI ≥ 0.8), while the ICC for the hot-spot method (0.83; 95% CI = 0.74-0.90) did not. Visually, interobserver concordance in location of selected hot-spots varies between cases. The median times for scoring were 9 and 6 min for global and hot-spot methods, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The global scoring method demonstrates adequate reproducibility to warrant next steps towards evaluation for technical and clinical validity in appropriate cohorts of cases. The time taken for scoring by either method is practical using counting software we are making publicly available. Establishment of external quality assessment schemes is likely to improve the reproducibility between laboratories further.

Multigene panel testing for breast and ovarian cancer predisposition diagnosis is a useful tool as it makes possible to sequence a considerable number of genes in a large number of individuals. More than 200 different multigene panels in which the two major BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancer predisposing genes are included are proposed by public or commercial laboratories. We review the clinical validity and clinical utility of the 26 genes most oftenly included in these panels. Because clinical validity and utility are not established for all genes and due to the heterogeneity of tumour risk levels, there is a substantial difficulty in the routine use of multigene panels if management guidelines and recommendations for testing relatives are not previously defined for each gene. Besides, the classification of variant of unknown significance (VUS) is a particular limitation and challenge. Efforts to classify VUSs and also to identify factors that modify cancer risks are now needed to produce personalised risk estimates. The complexity of information, the capacity to come back to patients when VUS are re-classified as pathogenic, and the expected large increase in the number of individuals to be tested especially when the aim of multigene panel testing is not only prevention but also treatment are challenging both for physicians and patients. Quality of tests, interpretation of results, information and accompaniment of patients must be at the heart of the guidelines of multigene panel testing.

Recent circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) research has demonstrated its potential as a non-invasive biomarker for cancer. However, the deployment of ctDNA assays in routine clinical practice remains challenging owing to variability in analytical approaches and the assessment of clinical significance. A well-developed, analytically valid ctDNA assay is a prerequisite for integrating ctDNA into cancer management, and an appropriate analytical technology is crucial for the development of a ctDNA assay. Other determinants including pre-analytical procedures, test validation, internal quality control (IQC), and continual proficiency testing (PT) are also important for the accuracy of ctDNA assays. In the present review, we will focus on the most widely used ctDNA detection technologies and the key quality management measures used to assure the accuracy of ctDNA assays. The aim of this review is to provide useful information for technology selection during ctDNA assay development and assure a reliable test result in clinical practice.