Biomedical Laboratory Science

ShareThis

Showing posts with label Interpretation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Interpretation. Show all posts

Sunday, June 10, 2018

Serum Iron Test: High, Low, and Normal Ranges !

Having too much or too little iron in the blood can cause serious health problems.
If a doctor suspects that a person does not have a healthy amount of iron in their blood, they may order a serum iron test.


In this article, learn more about the uses of a serum iron test. We also explain the normal ranges of iron in the blood and the treatment options for people whose iron levels are too high or too low.

Saturday, October 29, 2016

Breast Cancer: The Body of Knowledge Grows

Scientists’ understanding of the genetics/genomics of breast cancer continues to grow; a revolution is underway both in terms of categorizing breast cancers and targeting treatment that will be effective in individual cases. New perspectives are being offered on the interpretation of biopsies, too. Here is a round-up of some very recent studies.

Genetic variants alter cells’ response to estrogen
An international study of almost 120,000 women has newly identified five genetic variants affecting risk of breast cancer, all of which are believed to influence how breast cells respond to the female sex hormone estrogen.

Estrogen acts as a trigger, binding to a molecule known as an estrogen receptor in most breast cells and triggering a cascade of signals that cause the cell to behave normally. However, the estrogen receptor is switched off in some cells and these do not respond to the hormone.



Tuesday, April 19, 2016

Standardizing Immunoassays: The Benefits of Conformity

Interpreting results of immunoassay-based methods frequently presents a challenge for physicians, especially when caring for patients at multiple institutions that use different assay platforms. For many analytes including tumor markers, endocrine hormones, and cardiac biomarkers, results generated on different platforms are not directly comparable. This is due to the absence of a universally accepted reference material, which manufacturers need to calibrate their assays to a common standard.

Instead, test results must be interpreted using assay-specific reference intervals—a concept that comes naturally to clinical laboratorians but often is foreign to many physicians and patients. This lack of uniform results causes confusion that can adversely affect patient care, particularly when patients are diagnosed at one hospital but pursue follow-up care elsewhere. For example, does an increased CA-125 value at follow-up at a different institution reflect disease progression or simply differences in assay calibration? A lack of standardization also makes it impossible to transfer diagnostic cutoffs from one institution to another unless the assay platforms are identical.

Given the confusion associated with non-standardized assays, why haven’t all immunoassays already been standardized?



Source: alfa
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

AddToAny