Why Public Health Agencies Cannot Depend on Good Laboratory Practices as a Criterion for Selecting Data: The Case of Bisphenol A

In their safety evaluations of bisphenol A (BPA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and a counterpart in Europe, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), have given special prominence to two industry-funded studies that adhered to standards defined by Good Laboratory Practices (GLP). These same agencies have given much less weight in risk assessments to a large number of independently replicated non-GLP studies conducted with government funding by the leading experts in various fields of science from around the world. OBJECTIVES: We reviewed differences between industry-funded GLP studies of BPA conducted by commercial laboratories for regulatory purposes and non-GLP studies conducted in academic and government laboratories to identify hazards and molecular mechanisms mediating adverse effects. We examined the methods and results in the GLP studies that were pivotal in the draft decision of the U.S. FDA declaring BPA safe in relation to findings from studies that were competitive for U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, peer-reviewed for publication in leading journals, subject to independent replication, but rejected by the U.S. FDA for regulatory purposes. DISCUSSION: Although the U.S. FDA and EFSA have deemed two industry-funded GLP studies of BPA to be superior to hundreds of studies funded by the U.S. NIH and NIH counterparts in other countries, the GLP studies on which the agencies based their decisions have serious conceptual and methodologic flaws. In addition, the U.S. FDA and EFSA have mistakenly assumed that GLP yields valid and reliable scientific findings (i.e., "good science"). Their rationale for favoring GLP studies over hundreds of publically funded studies ignores the central factor in determining the reliability and validity of scientific findings, namely, independent replication, and use of the most appropriate and sensitive state-of-the-art assays, neither of which is an expectation of industry-funded GLP research. CONCLUSIONS: Public health decisions should be based on studies using appropriate protocols with appropriate controls and the most sensitive assays, not GLP. Relevant NIH-funded research using state-of-the-art techniques should play a prominent role in safety evaluations of chemicals.

Preanalytical mistakes in samples from primary care patients.

BACKGROUND Preanalytical mistakes (PAMs) in samples usually led to rejection upon arrival to the clinical laboratory. However, PAMs might not always be detected and result in clinical problems. Thus, PAMs should be minimized. We detected PAMs in samples from Primary Health Care Centres (PHCC) served by our central laboratory. Thus, the goal of this study was to describe the number and types of PAMs, and to suggest some strategies for improvement. METHODS The presence of PAMs, as sample rejection criteria, in samples submitted from PHCC to our laboratory during October and November 2007 was retrospectively analysed. RESULTS Overall, 3885 PAMs (7.4%) were detected from 52,669 samples for blood analyses. This included missed samples (n=1763; 45.4% of all PAMs, 3.3% of all samples), haemolysed samples (n=1408; 36.2% and 2.7%, respectively), coagulated samples (n=391; 10% and 0.7%, respectively), incorrect sample volume (n=110; 2.8% and 0.2%, respectively), and others (n=213; 5.5% and 0.4%, respectively). For urine samples (n=18,852), 1567 of the samples were missing (8.3%). CONCLUSIONS We found the proportion of PAMs in blood and urine samples to be 3-fold higher than that reported in the literature. Therefore, strategies for improvement directed towards the staff involved, as well as an exhaustive audit of preanalytical process are needed. To attain this goal, we first implemented a continued education programme, financed by our Regional Health Service and focused in Primary Care Nurses.

Sources of pre-analytical variations in yield of DNA extracted from blood samples: analysis of 50,000 DNA samples in EPIC.

The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and nutrition (EPIC) is a long-term, multi-centric prospective study in Europe investigating the relationships between cancer and nutrition. This study has served as a basis for a number of Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) and other types of genetic analyses. Over a period of 5 years, 52,256 EPIC DNA samples have been extracted using an automated DNA extraction platform. Here we have evaluated the pre-analytical factors affecting DNA yield, including anthropometric, epidemiological and technical factors such as center of subject recruitment, age, gender, body-mass index, disease case or control status, tobacco consumption, number of aliquots of buffy coat used for DNA extraction, extraction machine or procedure, DNA quantification method, degree of haemolysis and variations in the timing of sample processing. We show that the largest significant variations in DNA yield were observed with degree of haemolysis and with center of subject recruitment. Age, gender, body-mass index, cancer case or control status and tobacco consumption also significantly impacted DNA yield. Feedback from laboratories which have analyzed DNA with different SNP genotyping technologies demonstrate that the vast majority of samples (approximately 88%) performed adequately in different types of assays. To our knowledge this study is the largest to date to evaluate the sources of pre-analytical variations in DNA extracted from peripheral leucocytes. The results provide a strong evidence-based rationale for standardized recommendations on blood collection and processing protocols for large-scale genetic studies.

Preparation of bacterial DNA template by boiling and effect of immunoglobulin G as an inhibitor in real-time PCR for serum samples from patients with brucellosis.

Real-time PCR is a widely used tool for the diagnosis of many infectious diseases. However, little information exists about the influences of the different factors involved in PCR on the amplification efficiency. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of boiling as the DNA preparation method on the efficiency of the amplification process of real-time PCR for the diagnosis of human brucellosis with serum samples. Serum samples from 10 brucellosis patients were analyzed by a SYBR green I LightCycler-based real-time PCR and by using boiling to obtain the DNA. DNA prepared by boiling lysis of the bacteria isolated from serum did not prevent the presence of inhibitors, such as immunoglobulin G (IgG), which were extracted with the template DNA. To identify and confirm the presence of IgG, serum was precipitated to separate and concentrate the IgG and was analyzed by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and Western blotting. The use of serum volumes above 0.6 ml completely inhibited the amplification process. The inhibitory effect of IgG in serum samples was not concentration dependent, and it could be eliminated by diluting the samples 1/10 and 1/20 in water. Despite the lack of the complete elimination of the IgG from the template DNA, boiling does not require any special equipment and it provides a rapid, reproducible, and cost-effective method for the preparation of DNA from serum samples for the diagnosis of brucellosis.

Levels of immune cells in transcendental meditation practitioners.

CONTEXT Relationships between mind and body have gradually become accepted. Yogic practices cause modulation of the immune system. Transcendental meditation (TM) is a specific form of mantra meditation. We reported previously different plasma levels of catecholamines and pituitary hormones in TM practitioners comparing with a control group, and patterns of the daytime secretion of these hormones different from those normally described. AIMS The aim of the following study is to evaluate the immune system in these meditation practitioners, by determining leukocytes and lymphocytes subsets. METHODS TM group consisted of 19 subjects who regularly practice either TM or the more advanced Sidhi-TM technique. A control group consisted of 16 healthy subjects who had not previously used any relaxation technique. Total leukocytes, granulocytes, lymphocytes and monocytes were counted by an automated quantitative hematology analyzer, whereas lymphocytes subsets were determined by flow cytometry. Samples were taken from each subject at 0900 h after an overnight fast. RESULTS The results indicated that the TM group had higher values than the control group in CD3+CD4-CD8+ lymphocytes (P < 0.05), B lymphocytes (P < 0.01) and natural killer cells (P < 0.01), whereas CD3+CD4+CD8- lymphocytes showed low levels in meditation practitioners (P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in total leukocytes, granulocytes, monocytes, total lymphocytes or CD3+ lymphocytes comparing both groups. CONCLUSIONS The technique of meditation studied seems to have a significant effect on immune cells, manifesting in the different circulating levels of lymphocyte subsets analyzed. The significant effect of TM on the neuroendocrine axis and its relationship with the immune system may partly explain our results.

Liver safety assessment: required data elements and best practices for data collection and standardization in clinical trials.

A workshop was convened to discuss best practices for the assessment of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) in clinical trials. In a breakout session, workshop attendees discussed necessary data elements and standards for the accurate measurement of DILI risk associated with new therapeutic agents in clinical trials. There was agreement that in order to achieve this goal the systematic acquisition of protocol-specified clinical measures and lab specimens from all study subjects is crucial. In addition, standard DILI terms that address the diverse clinical and pathologic signatures of DILI were considered essential. There was a strong consensus that clinical and lab analyses necessary for the evaluation of cases of acute liver injury should be consistent with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance on pre-marketing risk assessment of DILI in clinical trials issued in 2009. A recommendation that liver injury case review and management be guided by clinicians with hepatologic expertise was made. Of note, there was agreement that emerging DILI signals should prompt the systematic collection of candidate pharmacogenomic, proteomic and/or metabonomic biomarkers from all study subjects. The use of emerging standardized clinical terminology, CRFs and graphic tools for data review to enable harmonization across clinical trials was strongly encouraged. Many of the recommendations made in the breakout session are in alignment with those made in the other parallel sessions on methodology to assess clinical liver safety data, causality assessment for suspected DILI, and liver safety assessment in special populations (hepatitis B, C, and oncology trials). Nonetheless, a few outstanding issues remain for future consideration.