Background: Recent recognition of its broad pathophysiological importance has triggered an increased interest in 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D]. By consequence, throughput in 25(OH)D testing has become an issue for clinical laboratories, and several automated assays for measurement of 25(OH)D are now available. The aim of this study was to test the accuracy and robustness of these assays by comparing their results to those of an isotope dilution/online solid-phase extraction liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (ID-XLC-MS/MS) method. We put specific focus on the influence of vitamin D-binding protein (DBP) by using samples with various concentrations of DBP.
Methods: We used 5 automated assays (Architect, Centaur, iSYS, Liaison, and Elecsys), 1 RIA (Diasorin) preceded by extraction, and an ID-XLC-MS/MS method to measure 25(OH)D concentrations in plasma samples of 51 healthy individuals, 52 pregnant women, 50 hemodialysis patients, and 50 intensive care patients. Using ELISA, we also measured DBP concentrations in these samples.
Results: Most of the examined 25(OH)D assays showed significant deviations in 25(OH)D concentrations from those of the ID-XLC-MS/MS method. As expected, DBP concentrations were higher in samples of pregnant women and lower in samples of IC patients compared to healthy controls. In 4 of the 5 fully automated 25(OH)D assays, we observed an inverse relationship between DBP concentrations and deviations from the ID-XLC-MS/MS results.
Conclusions: 25(OH)D measurements performed with most immunoassays suffer from inaccuracies that are DBP concentration dependent. Therefore, when interpreting results of 25(OH)D measurements, careful consideration of the measurement method is necessary.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2011.176545 | DOI Listing |
Clin Biochem
December 2017
Department of Clinical Chemistry, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address:
Objectives: Multiple 25(OH)D assays have recently been aligned to improve comparibility. In this study we investigated the performance of these assays using both native single-donor sera with target values certified by a reference method as well as single donor sera from a heterogeneous patient population.
Design & Methods: 25(OH)D levels were measured in twenty reference samples (Ref!25OHD; Labquality, Finland) using five automated methods (Lumipulse, Liaison, Cobas, iSYS and Access) and one aligned ID-XLC-MS/MS method (slope: 1,00; intercept: 0,00; R=0,996).
Clin Chim Acta
January 2013
Department of Laboratory Medicine, AZ Sint-Jan Bruges-Ostend AV, 8000 Bruges, Belgium.
Introduction: We evaluated the accuracy of three automated assays for 25(OH)D measurement in comparison to ID-XLC-MS/MS in hemodialysis patients, considering the importance of their vitamin D status and reported discrepant results obtained with automated assays.
Methods: All three assays were heterogeneous, competitive immunoassays or vitamin D binding protein assays on Architect (Abbott), Modular E170 (Roche) and iSYS (IDS). Measurements were performed in serum of 99 hemodialysis patients and 50 healthy subjects, double blind with a different operator and aliquot for each method.
Clin Chem
March 2012
Department of Clinical Chemistry, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Background: Recent recognition of its broad pathophysiological importance has triggered an increased interest in 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D]. By consequence, throughput in 25(OH)D testing has become an issue for clinical laboratories, and several automated assays for measurement of 25(OH)D are now available. The aim of this study was to test the accuracy and robustness of these assays by comparing their results to those of an isotope dilution/online solid-phase extraction liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (ID-XLC-MS/MS) method.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!