Key result
Stringent IFCC criteria lower hs-cTnT Gen 6 99th percentile upper reference limits across sexes.
Why the study?
Because hs-cTn values are influenced by comorbidities and subclinical disease, the IFCC recommends stringent criteria for defining a healthy reference population. This study evaluated the impact of applying these IFCC criteria on hs-cTnT Gen 6 99th percentile URLs.
Does applying stringent IFCC healthy reference population exclusion criteria lower the hs-cTnT Gen 6 99th percentile upper reference limits compared to more liberal criteria in apparently healthy adults?
Observational (n=7,910)
Yes
Does applying stringent IFCC healthy reference population exclusion criteria lower the hs-cTnT Gen 6 99th percentile upper reference limits compared to more liberal criteria in apparently healthy adults?
Applying stringent IFCC exclusion criteria to define a healthy reference population substantially lowers the uniform and sex-specific 99th percentile upper reference limits for the hs-cTnT Gen 6 assay by excluding individuals with underlying clinical or subclinical conditions.
May alter MI diagnostic thresholds; extends IFCC reference data but leaves open outcome validation before clinical adoption.
Background Guidelines recommend high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) concentrations above the 99th percentile upper reference limit (URL) to support the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction. Because hs-cTn values are influenced by comorbidities and subclinical/silent disease, the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) recommends stringent criteria for defining a healthy reference population. Purpose We evaluated the impact of applying the IFCC criteria on hs-cTnT Gen 6 99th percentile URLs in the REF-TSIX Study. Methods In four global regions (United States, Europe, Japan, China) 7,910 apparently healthy adults (≥20 years) were enrolled. Lithium-heparin plasma and serum samples were prospectively collected and TnT hs Gen 6 measured on an automated high-throughput immunoassay analyser. Exclusion criteria were applied a priori (-IFCC, more liberal) and then post hoc to meet IFCC recommendations (+IFCC, more stringent) including: cardiovascular disease history/symptoms, recent chest trauma, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, pregnancy, NT-proBNP ≥125 ng/L, treatment for hyperlipidaemia or hypertension, body mass index (BMI) <18 kg/m2 or >35 kg/m2, smoking, or other chronic diseases potentially affecting the heart (Figure 1). Uniform and sex-specific 99th percentile URLs were determined for each matrix individually and combined. Results Overall, there were 4,147 in the +IFCC and 6,533 in the -IFCC cohort of whom 52% and 49% were female, respectively; median ages were 48 and 51 years, and mean (SD) BMIs were 25.1 (3.7) and 26.3 (5.5) kg/m2 for +IFCC and -IFCC, respectively (Figure 2a). With sample matrices combined, the proportion with measurable hs-cTnT (≥ limit of detection) was high and differed by sex (81-84% of females and >99% of males in both cohorts). Applying IFCC criteria lowered the 99th percentile URLs from 24, 37, and 32 ng/L to 18, 32, and 27 ng/L for females, males and uniform cut points, respectively (Figure 2b). Across cohorts, lithium-heparin and serum URLs showed very good comparability. Conclusion Applying the stringent IFCC exclusion criteria to define a healthy reference population has a substantial impact on the hs-cTnT Gen 6 99th percentile URLs by excluding individuals with clinical or subclinical conditions associated with an elevated cTnT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daniels et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Healthy reference population for acute myocardial infarction diagnosis (n=7,910). Stringent IFCC exclusion criteria (+IFCC) vs. Liberal a priori exclusion criteria (-IFCC) was evaluated on Uniform and sex-specific hs-cTnT Gen 6 99th percentile upper reference limits (URLs). Applying stringent IFCC criteria lowered hs-cTnT Gen 6 99th percentile URLs from 24, 37, and 32 ng/L to 18, 32, and 27 ng/L for females, males, and uniform cut points, respectively.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: