Accuracy of 6 Routine 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Assays: Influence of Vitamin D Binding Protein Concentration
Accuracy of 6 Routine 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Assays: Influence of Vitamin D Binding Protein Concentration
复制标题
DOI：
10.1373/clinchem.2011.176545
复制
发表时间：
2012-03-01
影响因子：
9.3
通讯作者：
Buijs, Madelon M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Heijboer, Annemieke C.;Blankenstein, Marinus A.;Buijs, Madelon M.
背景：最近认识到其广泛的病理生理学重要性，引发了对25-羟基维生素D [25（OH）D]的兴趣增加。因此，25（OH）D检测的通量已成为临床实验室的一个问题，现在有几种用于测量25（OH）D的自动化测定法。本研究的目的是通过将其结果与同位素稀释/在线固相萃取液相色谱/串联质谱（ID-XLC-MS/MS）方法的结果进行比较，检测这些测定的准确度和耐用性。我们通过使用不同浓度的DBP的样品，特别关注维生素D结合蛋白（DBP）的影响。我们使用了5个自动化检测（建筑师、Centaur、iPhone4、Liaison和Elecsys），1 RIA（Diasorin）提取前，和ID-XLC-MS/MS方法测量51名健康人，52名孕妇，50名血液透析患者和50名重症监护患者。结果：大多数25（OH）D测定法与ID-XLC-MS/MS法测定结果有显著性差异。正如预期的那样，与健康对照组相比，孕妇样本中的DBP浓度较高，IC患者样本中的DBP浓度较低。在4的5个全自动25（OH）D测定，我们观察到DBP浓度和ID-XLC-MS/MS结果的偏差之间的反比关系。结论：25（OH）D测量与大多数免疫测定遭受DBP浓度依赖的不准确性。因此，在解释25（OH）D测量结果时，必须仔细考虑测量方法。(C)2011年美国临床化学协会
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. (C) 2011 American Association for Clinical Chemistry