Go to JCI Insight
Jci spelled out white on transparent.20160208
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Alerts
  • Advertising/recruitment
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • By specialty
    • Cardiology
    • Gastroenterology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Neuroscience
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • Vascular biology
    • All...
  • Videos
    • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
    • Author's Takes
  • Reviews
    • View all reviews...
    • Cellular senescence in human disease (Apr 2018)
    • Fibrosis (Jan 2018)
    • Glia and Neurodegeneration (Sep 2017)
    • Transplantation (Jun 2017)
    • Nuclear Receptors (Apr 2017)
    • Metabolism and Inflammation (Jan 2017)
    • Hypoxia and Inflammation (Oct 2016)
    • View all review series...
  • Collections
    • Recently published
    • Commentaries
    • Concise Communication
    • Editorials
    • Opinion
    • Scientific Show Stoppers
    • Top read articles
    • In-Press Preview
  • Clinical Medicine
  • JCI This Month
    • Current issue
    • Past issues

Jci only white

  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
  • Author's Takes
  • Recently published
  • Brief Reports
  • Technical Advances
  • Commentaries
  • Editorials
  • Hindsight
  • Review series
  • Reviews
  • The Attending Physician
  • First Author Perspectives
  • Scientific Show Stoppers
  • Top read articles
  • Concise Communication
Evaluation of direct-to-consumer low-volume lab tests in healthy adults
Brian A. Kidd, … , Eric E. Schadt, Joel T. Dudley
Brian A. Kidd, … , Eric E. Schadt, Joel T. Dudley
Published May 2, 2016
Citation Information: J Clin Invest. 2016;126(5):1734-1744. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI86318.
View: Text | PDF | Corrigendum
Categories: Clinical Medicine Hematology

Evaluation of direct-to-consumer low-volume lab tests in healthy adults

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

BACKGROUND. Clinical laboratory tests are now being prescribed and made directly available to consumers through retail outlets in the USA. Concerns with these test have been raised regarding the uncertainty of testing methods used in these venues and a lack of open, scientific validation of the technical accuracy and clinical equivalency of results obtained through these services.

METHODS. We conducted a cohort study of 60 healthy adults to compare the uncertainty and accuracy in 22 common clinical lab tests between one company offering blood tests obtained from finger prick (Theranos) and 2 major clinical testing services that require standard venipuncture draws (Quest and LabCorp). Samples were collected in Phoenix, Arizona, at an ambulatory clinic and at retail outlets with point-of-care services.

RESULTS. Theranos flagged tests outside their normal range 1.6× more often than other testing services (P < 0.0001). Of the 22 lab measurements evaluated, 15 (68%) showed significant interservice variability (P < 0.002). We found nonequivalent lipid panel test results between Theranos and other clinical services. Variability in testing services, sample collection times, and subjects markedly influenced lab results.

CONCLUSION. While laboratory practice standards exist to control this variability, the disparities between testing services we observed could potentially alter clinical interpretation and health care utilization. Greater transparency and evaluation of testing technologies would increase their utility in personalized health management.

FUNDING. This work was supported by the Icahn Institute for Genomics and Multiscale Biology, a gift from the Harris Family Charitable Foundation (to J.T. Dudley), and grants from the NIH (R01 DK098242 and U54 CA189201, to J.T. Dudley, and R01 AG046170 and U01 AI111598, to E.E. Schadt).

Authors

Brian A. Kidd, Gabriel Hoffman, Noah Zimmerman, Li Li, Joseph W. Morgan, Patricia K. Glowe, Gregory J. Botwin, Samir Parekh, Nikolina Babic, Matthew W. Doust, Gregory B. Stock, Eric E. Schadt, Joel T. Dudley

×

Figure 5

Estimation of laboratory test bias for cholesterol measurements.

Options: View larger image (or click on image) Download as PowerPoint
Estimation of laboratory test bias for cholesterol measurements.
Bias es...
Bias estimated calculated using the Passing-Bablok regression (17). Blue line represents the bias across a range of values, and the shaded regions depict the 95% CI. Comparisons show the bias between 2 services. (A) Bias between Theranos low-volume results when LabCorp is the reference. (B) Bias between LabCorp and Quest.
Follow JCI: Facebook logo white Twitter logo v2 Rss icon
Copyright © 2018 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN: 0021-9738 (print), 1558-8238 (online)

Sign up for email alerts