Cargando…

Multicenter Comparison of Seven 25OH Vitamin D Automated Immunoassays

BACKGROUND: The measurement of 25OH vitamin D continues to grow in clinical laboratories. The aim of this multi-center study was to compare the results of seven automated commercial immunoassays with a reference HPLC technique. METHODS: One hundred and twenty consecutive outpatient serum samples wer...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lippi, Giuseppe, Salvagno, Gian Luca, Fortunato, Antonio, Dipalo, Mariella, Aloe, Rosalia, Da Rin, Giorgio, Giavarina, Davide
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Society of Medical Biochemists of Serbia 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4922348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28356846
http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/jomb-2014-0054
_version_ 1782439609012060160
author Lippi, Giuseppe
Salvagno, Gian Luca
Fortunato, Antonio
Dipalo, Mariella
Aloe, Rosalia
Da Rin, Giorgio
Giavarina, Davide
author_facet Lippi, Giuseppe
Salvagno, Gian Luca
Fortunato, Antonio
Dipalo, Mariella
Aloe, Rosalia
Da Rin, Giorgio
Giavarina, Davide
author_sort Lippi, Giuseppe
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The measurement of 25OH vitamin D continues to grow in clinical laboratories. The aim of this multi-center study was to compare the results of seven automated commercial immunoassays with a reference HPLC technique. METHODS: One hundred and twenty consecutive outpatient serum samples were centrifuged, divided in aliquots, frozen and shipped to the participating laboratories. 25OH Vitamin D was measured with a reference HPLC system and with seven automated commercial immunoassays (Roche Cobas E601, Beckman Coulter Unicel DXI 800, Ortho Vitros ES, DiaSorin Liaison, Siemens Advia Centaur, Abbott Architect i System and IDS iSYS). RESULTS: Compared to the reference method, the regression coefficients ranged from 0.923 to 0.961 (all p<0.001). The slope of Deming fit ranged from 0.95 to 1.06, whereas the intercept was comprised between −15.2 and 9.2 nmol/L. The bias from the reference HPLC technique varied from −14.5 to 8.7 nmol/L. The minimum performance goal for bias was slightly exceeded by only one immunoassay. The agreement between HPLC and the different immunoassays at 50 nmol/L 25OH Vitamin D varied between 0.61 and 0.85 (all p<0.001). The percentage of samples below this cut-off was significantly different with only one immunoassay. CONCLUSIONS: The excellent correlation with the reference HPLC technique attests that all seven automated immunoassays may be reliably used for routine assessment of 25OH-D in clinical laboratories. The significant bias among the different methods seems mostly attributable to the lack of standardization and calls for additional efforts for improving harmonization of 25OH-D immunoassays.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4922348
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Society of Medical Biochemists of Serbia
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49223482017-03-29 Multicenter Comparison of Seven 25OH Vitamin D Automated Immunoassays Lippi, Giuseppe Salvagno, Gian Luca Fortunato, Antonio Dipalo, Mariella Aloe, Rosalia Da Rin, Giorgio Giavarina, Davide J Med Biochem Original Paper BACKGROUND: The measurement of 25OH vitamin D continues to grow in clinical laboratories. The aim of this multi-center study was to compare the results of seven automated commercial immunoassays with a reference HPLC technique. METHODS: One hundred and twenty consecutive outpatient serum samples were centrifuged, divided in aliquots, frozen and shipped to the participating laboratories. 25OH Vitamin D was measured with a reference HPLC system and with seven automated commercial immunoassays (Roche Cobas E601, Beckman Coulter Unicel DXI 800, Ortho Vitros ES, DiaSorin Liaison, Siemens Advia Centaur, Abbott Architect i System and IDS iSYS). RESULTS: Compared to the reference method, the regression coefficients ranged from 0.923 to 0.961 (all p<0.001). The slope of Deming fit ranged from 0.95 to 1.06, whereas the intercept was comprised between −15.2 and 9.2 nmol/L. The bias from the reference HPLC technique varied from −14.5 to 8.7 nmol/L. The minimum performance goal for bias was slightly exceeded by only one immunoassay. The agreement between HPLC and the different immunoassays at 50 nmol/L 25OH Vitamin D varied between 0.61 and 0.85 (all p<0.001). The percentage of samples below this cut-off was significantly different with only one immunoassay. CONCLUSIONS: The excellent correlation with the reference HPLC technique attests that all seven automated immunoassays may be reliably used for routine assessment of 25OH-D in clinical laboratories. The significant bias among the different methods seems mostly attributable to the lack of standardization and calls for additional efforts for improving harmonization of 25OH-D immunoassays. Society of Medical Biochemists of Serbia 2015-07 2015-07-14 /pmc/articles/PMC4922348/ /pubmed/28356846 http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/jomb-2014-0054 Text en © by Giuseppe Lippi http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Lippi, Giuseppe
Salvagno, Gian Luca
Fortunato, Antonio
Dipalo, Mariella
Aloe, Rosalia
Da Rin, Giorgio
Giavarina, Davide
Multicenter Comparison of Seven 25OH Vitamin D Automated Immunoassays
title Multicenter Comparison of Seven 25OH Vitamin D Automated Immunoassays
title_full Multicenter Comparison of Seven 25OH Vitamin D Automated Immunoassays
title_fullStr Multicenter Comparison of Seven 25OH Vitamin D Automated Immunoassays
title_full_unstemmed Multicenter Comparison of Seven 25OH Vitamin D Automated Immunoassays
title_short Multicenter Comparison of Seven 25OH Vitamin D Automated Immunoassays
title_sort multicenter comparison of seven 25oh vitamin d automated immunoassays
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4922348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28356846
http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/jomb-2014-0054
work_keys_str_mv AT lippigiuseppe multicentercomparisonofseven25ohvitamindautomatedimmunoassays
AT salvagnogianluca multicentercomparisonofseven25ohvitamindautomatedimmunoassays
AT fortunatoantonio multicentercomparisonofseven25ohvitamindautomatedimmunoassays
AT dipalomariella multicentercomparisonofseven25ohvitamindautomatedimmunoassays
AT aloerosalia multicentercomparisonofseven25ohvitamindautomatedimmunoassays
AT daringiorgio multicentercomparisonofseven25ohvitamindautomatedimmunoassays
AT giavarinadavide multicentercomparisonofseven25ohvitamindautomatedimmunoassays