180 likes | 308 Views
Rob Brown. Streamlining and efficiency in hereditary Haemochromatosis testing at the Newcastle laboratory. Aims of this talk. To think about how we can save money in the lab.
E N D
Rob Brown Streamlining and efficiency in hereditary Haemochromatosistesting at the Newcastle laboratory
Aims of this talk • To think about how we can save money in the lab. • To discuss how Haemochromatosis testing has changed and developed over time in Newcastle and how this has improved efficiency and reduced costs. • To encourage Genetic Technologists and Healthcare Practitioners to take a lead role in suggesting and implementing changes that drive efficiency and money saving.
Hard times... • Money is tight. • Things could get worse. • Savings to be made in 2012/13 and beyond. • Are we as efficient as we can be? • Can we save money without reducing quality and therefore continue to ensure efficient and effective use of resources in delivery of patient care?
The example of HFE testing • Hereditary Haemochromatosis testing in Newcastle is a good example of how becoming more efficient has not only reduced costs but has generated income for the department. • By reviewing the last 5 years we can observe how the testing process has changed, how the number of referrals have increased and where efficiencies and savings have been achieved.
Considerations • What I want you to think about is… • Is there more we could do to improve efficiency? • Are there further savings that can be made? • Can the model presented here be applied to other disorders or to testing in other labs?
Hereditary Haemochromatosis • Autosomal recessive • HFE gene • chromosome 6p21.3 • characterized by high absorption of iron by the gastrointestinal mucosa, resulting in excessive storage of iron in the: • Early symptoms include: • Abdominal pain • Weakness • Lethargy • weight loss. • Advanced symptoms include: • increase in skin pigmentation • diabetes mellitus • congestive heart failure • liver cirrhosis with an increased risk of liver cancer.
Hereditary Haemochromatosis Causative mutations: c.845G>A p.Cys282Tyr (C282Y) & c.187C>G p.His63Asp(H63D) • ~95% of HFE related Haemochromatosis cases are caused by homozygosity for the C282Y mutation. • Penetrance of this mutation is predicted to between 2% and 50%. • Therefore many people who are homozygous for the C282Y mutation will never develop symptoms. • The compound heterozygote (C282Y/H63D) genotype has an even lower penetrance with approximately 0.5%-2% of patients developing clinical symptoms. • Homozygosity of the H63D mutation can lead to mild iron overload but has an even lower penetrance than compound heterozygotes and very rarely leads to clinical symptoms.
Hereditary Haemochromatosis • Clinical detection and treatment: • Individuals showing symptoms of Haemochromatosis undertake a biochemical test to determine transferrin-iron saturation and/or serum ferritin levels. • Patients with raised transferrin-iron saturation and/or serum ferritin levels are referred for genetic testing. • Treatment for symptomatic patients with a positive genotype is therapeutic phlebotomy. • Lifestyle factors such as diet should be taken into consideration to prevent iron overload i.e. reduction of red meat consumption.
Method of genotyping prior to 2006 C282Y • 50μl PCR reaction - 2.5hrs -3hrs. • Overnight restriction enzyme digest Rsa1 at 37°C. • Run PCR products and enzyme digest products in adjacent lanes on a 2.5% 3:1 agarose gel for 3 hrs and stain with ethidium bromide. H63D • Reflex test for CY result or for patients with a known family history • 50μl PCR reaction - 2.5hrs -3hrs. • Overnight restriction enzyme digest Mbo1 at 37°C. • Run PCR products and enzyme digest products in adjacent lanes on a 2.5% 3:1 agarose gel for 3 hrs and stain with ethidium bromide. Jeffrey et al. (1999) Nature Genet.22: 325-329.
Method of genotyping prior to 2006 • Laborious and time consuming. • Only possible to process small numbers and batches. • Drew heavily on the resources of the scientist and/or the technician.
Method of genotyping in 2009 • PCR and melt curve analysis on the Lightcycler LC480. • Hyb-Probe HFE genotyping – labelled probe and meltcurve analysis (closed system). • Results analysed on Lightcycler software. • Reflex test for heterozygous individuals. • Automated PCR set-up. • Automated DNA extraction. Homogeneous Multiplex Genotyping of Haemochromatosis Mutations with Fluorescent Hybridisation Probes. Bernard, P.S., et al.,(1998). Am J Pathology, 153: 1055-1061
Method of genotyping in 2009 • Overall time taken for testing significantly reduced. • Capacity increased (i.e., after DNA extraction testing for up to 100 samples can be done in one afternoon). • Reflex test can be set up the next day for heterozygous individuals. • Significant reduction in technician/scientist resources required per sample. • Cost per sample reduced.
Method of genotyping in 2011 • Luna Probe HFE Genotyping • From this year our laboratory has performed HFE genotyping using the Luna probe assay on the Light Scanner. • The Luna probe approach is a diplex reaction in which both the C282Y and H63D mutation sites are co-amplified and subject to melt curve analysis. • Unlabelled probe approach. • Assay based on the analysis of the melt curve profile from probe hybridized to the target region. • Results analysed using Light Scanner software.
Method of genotyping in 2011 • Cost of unlabelled probe approach 50% cheaper than labelled Lightcycler probes. • Assay for C282Y and H63D run concurrently so consumables are reduced. • Technician/practitioner time saved because reflex test is integrated with the original test. • Overall time for testing equal to that of Lightcycler, therefore the above savings justify the change of method.
So what has changed? • Number of samples referred has increased. • DNA extraction method is now fully automated. • Paperwork retention and filing has been streamlined. • PCR setup has become automated. • Shift in lab work from scientist to technician. • Shift towards analysis and reporting from scientist to technician. • Time limitations introduced for DNA storage (i.e., DNA sample discarded after specified time period).
Summary • Automated processes introduced. • Significant increase in capacity. • Reduction in cost of consumables per sample processed. • Reduction in technician/practitioner or scientist time per sample processed. • More responsibility to the technician/practitioner saves time for the more expensive scientist. • Amount of storage required reduced.
So what now? • We all need to think about saving money. • Even tests that are efficient could possibly be tweaked or changed to save more money. • Small savings add up, especially when the numbers of samples are increased. • Genetic Technologists and Healthcare Practitioners should take a lead in lab based savings. • Greater responsibility in the laboratory is excellent for developing career pathways for Genetic Technologists and Healthcare Practitioners.