Download PDF
Semin Thromb Hemost 2019; 45(01): 010-021
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1667342
Review Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

How to Generate a More Accurate Laboratory-Based International Normalized Ratio: Solutions to Obtaining or Verifying the Mean Normal Prothrombin Time and International Sensitivity Index

Emmanuel J. Favaloro
1   Diagnostic Haemostasis Laboratory, Department of Haematology, Institute of Clinical Pathology and Medical Research (ICPMR), NSW Health Pathology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW, Australia
2   Sydney Centres for Thrombosis and Haemostasis, Westmead, NSW, Australia
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
22 August 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Although the landscape of anticoagulation therapy is evolving, vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) such as warfarin remain an anticoagulant of choice for many clinicians and their patients. Nevertheless, management of VKA therapy remains challenging, largely because of patient variability and drug and food interactions; thus, VKA dosing has to be personalized. This is achieved by regular monitoring using a test called the prothrombin time (PT), mathematically converted to an international normalized ratio (INR). The INR system is meant to harmonize laboratory test results by taking into account reagent and instrumentation variability that is otherwise expected to give rise to variable PT values, but which should accordingly lead to less variable INR values. Of clinical importance, too low an INR is suggestive of increased thrombotic risk and typically means the VKA dose should be increased, whereas too high an INR is suggestive of increased bleeding risk and typically means the VKA dose should be temporarily withheld and/or decreased. However, evidence continues to show that variability in INR values between laboratories remains unacceptably high. Given that modern instrumentation provides for robust analytical values—meaning highly reproducible intralaboratory clotting times or PTs in this case—the most likely cause of high INR variability is inconsistency in the INR test components—meaning the MNPT (mean normal PT) and ISI (international sensitivity index) values used by laboratories to generate a given INR. In other words, there are doubts as to the accuracy of some INR values because there are corresponding doubts about the accuracy of MNPT and/or ISI values that have been assigned by some laboratories for their reagent/instrument combination. The current report is intended to provide some solutions around the problems of inaccurate INRs, ISIs, and MNPTs, thus aiming to drive laboratory INRs closer to “truth,” and thus promote better patient management. The novel strategies include a primary process of transference to obtain/verify MNPT and/or ISI values for a new reagent using an existing reagent as reference, and a secondary process whereby external quality assessment data can be used to correct bias or existing errors in assigned MNPT and/or ISI values.

Keywords

international normalized ratio - mean normal prothrombin time - international sensitivity index

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this paper reflect those of the author, and not necessary those of NSW Health Pathology.


 

  • References

  • 1 Favaloro EJ, Lippi G, Koutts J. Laboratory testing of anticoagulants: the present and the future. Pathology 2011; 43 (07) 682-692
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Favaloro EJ, Lippi G. The new oral anticoagulants and the future of haemostasis laboratory testing. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2012; 22 (03) 329-341
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lippi G, Favaloro EJ. Recent guidelines and recommendations for laboratory assessment of the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs): is there consensus?. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015; 53 (02) 185-197
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Favaloro EJ, Pasalic L, Curnow J, Lippi G. Laboratory monitoring or measurement of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs): advantages, limitations and future challenges. Curr Drug Metab 2017; 18 (07) 598-608
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Favaloro EJ, Pasalic L, Lippi G. Replacing warfarin therapy with the newer direct oral anticoagulants, or simply a growth in anticoagulation therapy? Implications for pathology testing. Pathology 2017; 49 (06) 639-643
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Lippi G, Mattiuzzi C, Cervellin G, Favaloro EJ. Direct oral anticoagulants: analysis of worldwide use and popularity using Google Trends. Ann Transl Med 2017; 5 (16) 322
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gosselin RC, Adcock DM, Bates SM. , et al. International Council for Standardization in Haematology (ICSH) recommendations for laboratory measurement of direct oral anticoagulants. Thromb Haemost 2018; 118 (03) 437-450
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Van Cott EM, Smock KJ, Chen D, Hsu P, Zantek ND, Meijer P. Testing for dabigatran and rivaroxaban by clinical laboratories. Am J Hematol 2016; 91 (11) E464-E467
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bonar R, Favaloro EJ, Mohammed S, Pasalic L, Sioufi J, Marsden K. The effect of dabigatran on haemostasis tests: a comprehensive assessment using in vitro and ex vivo samples. Pathology 2015; 47 (04) 355-364
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Bonar R, Favaloro EJ, Mohammed S. , et al. The effect of the direct factor Xa inhibitors apixaban and rivaroxaban on haemostasis tests: a comprehensive assessment using in vitro and ex vivo samples. Pathology 2016; 48 (01) 60-71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Lippi G, Franchini M, Favaloro EJ. Pharmacogenetics of vitamin K antagonists: useful or hype?. Clin Chem Lab Med 2009; 47 (05) 503-515
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Bonar R, Mohammed S, Favaloro EJ. International normalized ratio monitoring of vitamin K antagonist therapy: comparative performance of point-of-care and laboratory-derived testing. Semin Thromb Hemost 2015; 41 (03) 279-286
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Kitchen DP, Jennings I, Kitchen S, Woods TA, Walker ID. Bridging the gap between point-of-care testing and laboratory testing in hemostasis. Semin Thromb Hemost 2015; 41 (03) 272-278
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Bonar R, Favaloro EJ. Explaining and reducing the variation in inter-laboratory reported values for International Normalised Ratio. Thromb Res 2017; 150: 22-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Guidelines for thromboplastins and plasma used to control oral anticoagulant therapy with vitamin K antagonists. Annex 6. WHO Expert Committee on Biological Standardization Sixty-second report. WHO Technical Report Series No. 979, 2013 . Available at: www.who.int/entity/bloodproducts/publications/TRS_979_Annex_6.pdf . Accessed April 11, 2018
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Procedures for Validation of INR and Local Calibration of PT/INR Systems; Approved Guideline. H54-A, Vol. 25, No. 23. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2005
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Keeling D, Baglin T, Tait C. , et al; British Committee for Standards in Haematology. Guidelines on oral anticoagulation with warfarin - fourth edition. Br J Haematol 2011; 154 (03) 311-324
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Senoo K, Lip GY. Comparative efficacy and safety of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Semin Thromb Hemost 2015; 41 (02) 146-153
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Olson JD, Brandt JT, Chandler WL. , et al. Laboratory reporting of the international normalized ratio: progress and problems. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2007; 131 (11) 1641-1647
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Favaloro EJ, Hamdam S, McDonald J, McVicker W, Ule V. Time to think outside the box? Prothrombin time, international normalised ratio, international sensitivity index, mean normal prothrombin time and measurement of uncertainty: a novel approach to standardisation. Pathology 2008; 40 (03) 277-287
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Marlar RA, Gausman JN. Do you report an accurate international normalized ratio? Find out using local verification and calibration. Lab Med 2011; 42 (03) 176-181
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Available at: http://www.fda.gov/ . Accessed April 29, 2018
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Favaloro EJ, Plebani M, Lippi G. Regulation in hemostasis and thrombosis: Part I—In vitro diagnostics. Semin Thromb Hemost 2013; 39 (03) 235-249
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Favaloro EJ, McVicker W, Hamdam S, Hocker N. Improving the harmonisation of the International Normalized Ratio (INR): time to think outside the box?. Clin Chem Lab Med 2010; 48 (08) 1079-1090
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Favaloro EJ, McVicker W, Zhang Y. , et al. Improving the inter-laboratory harmonization of the international normalized ratio (INR): utilizing the concept of transference to estimate and/or validate international sensitivity index (ISI) and mean normal prothrombin time (MNPT) values and/or to eliminate measurement bias. Clin Lab Sci 2012; 25 (01) 13-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Favaloro EJ, McVicker W, Lay M. , et al. Harmonizing the International Normalized Ratio (INR): standardization of methodologies and use of novel strategies to reduce inter-laboratory variation and bias. Am J Clin Pathol 2016; 145 (02) 191-202
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Favaloro EJ, Adcock DM. Standardization of the INR: how good is your laboratory's INR and can it be improved?. Semin Thromb Hemost 2008; 34 (07) 593-603
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Favaloro EJ. Optimizing the verification of mean normal prothrombin time (MNPT) and International Sensitivity Index (ISI) for accurate conversion of prothrombin time (PT) to International Normalized Ratio (INR). Methods Mol Biol 2017; 1646: 59-74
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Tange JI, Grill D, Koch CD. , et al. Local verification and assignment of mean normal prothrombin time and International Sensitivity Index values across various instruments: recent experience and outcome from North America. Semin Thromb Hemost 2014; 40 (01) 115-120
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Poller L, Keown M, Ibrahim S. , et al; European Concerted Action on Anticoagulation. Comparison of local International Sensitivity Index calibration and ‘Direct INR’ methods in correction of locally reported International Normalized Ratios: an international study. J Thromb Haemost 2007; 5 (05) 1002-1009
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar