Potencies within laboratories were combined using unweighted geometric means, and intra-laboratory variability was expressed as geometric coefficients of variation (%GCV) (Kirkwood, Vemurafenib cost 1979). Overall potencies were calculated as geometric means of the individual laboratory means, and inter-laboratory variability was expressed as %GCVs between laboratory means. The agreement between duplicate samples was assessed by calculating the difference in log potency estimates (relative to 86/504) of samples A and B for each assay, calculating the mean of the squared difference for each laboratory, taking the square root to give a root mean square

(RMS) value, and expressing this as an average percentage difference. Samples of the candidate standard 86/500 (coded A & B) stored at elevated temperatures (4 °C and 20 °C) for 26 years and 1 month were tested concurrently with those stored at the recommended storage temperature of − 20 °C, Idelalisib datasheet and baseline samples stored at − 70 °C. Samples had also been stored at + 37 °C but it was not possible to properly reconstitute these samples after such a long period at high

temperature. Four independent assays were performed and each assay replicated over three plates. The assays were analysed as described for the main collaborative study, and the potencies of all samples were expressed relative to the baseline samples stored at − 70 °C. In addition, the stability of the samples at 4 °C and 20 °C after periods of 4 h, 24 h and 1 week following reconstitution and after a series of freeze–thaw cycles (1 up to 4) was assessed relative to the freshly reconstituted sample. The assays were analysed as described for Urocanase the main collaborative study, and the potencies of the stored samples were expressed relative to the freshly reconstituted sample. All studies were conducted at NIBSC using the CTLL-2 cell-line-based bioassay. While a majority of participants (Hori et al., 1987) performed bioassays (Table 2), two participants also performed immunoassays (laboratories 1 and 6) as shown in Table 3. All participating laboratories returned data from at least three independent assays, each with multiple

plates. Only some responses at the highest and lowest concentrations in individual assays (hook effect and background) were excluded from the analysis. Since data from laboratory 4 exhibited a limited dose–response over a narrow dilution range, with high variability and high background levels, it was not possible to apply the parallel line sigmoid model to this data and results from this laboratory were not included. In total, statistical analysis included six data sets from bioassays and four from immunoassays. Sample D, containing rDNA-derived human IL-4, did not give a dose–response in any of the assays, and was not included in subsequent analysis. The laboratory mean potencies for samples A – C relative to the current IS 86/504 are shown in Table 4.