Cargando…

Measurement comparability of insulin assays using conventional immunoassay kits

BACKGROUND: The standardization of measurement aims to achieve comparability of results regardless of the analytical methods and the laboratory where analyses are carried out. In this paper, a comparison of results from several immunoassay‐based insulin analysis kits is described, and the steps nece...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rosli, Nordiana, Kwon, Ha‐Jeong, Lim, Jinsook, Yoon, Young Ahn, Jeong, Ji‐Seon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9279959/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35622611
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.24521
_version_ 1784746524869132288
author Rosli, Nordiana
Kwon, Ha‐Jeong
Lim, Jinsook
Yoon, Young Ahn
Jeong, Ji‐Seon
author_facet Rosli, Nordiana
Kwon, Ha‐Jeong
Lim, Jinsook
Yoon, Young Ahn
Jeong, Ji‐Seon
author_sort Rosli, Nordiana
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The standardization of measurement aims to achieve comparability of results regardless of the analytical methods and the laboratory where analyses are carried out. In this paper, a comparison of results from several immunoassay‐based insulin analysis kits is described, and the steps necessary to improve comparability are discussed. METHODS: Four manual enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kits produced by Mercodia, Alpco, Epitope Diagnostics, and Abcam, and three automated chemiluminescent (CLIA) insulin assay kits (Siemens Centaur XP, Unicel Dxl800, Cobas e801) were compared by analyzing human serum samples and certified reference materials for human insulin. RESULTS: The seven evaluated assay kits showed substantial discrepancies in the results, with relative standard deviation ranges between 1.7% and 23.2%. We find that the traceability chains and the unit conversion factors are not yet harmonized, and current reference materials for insulin are not applicable for immunoassay‐based method validation due to the use of different matrices. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest the need to fine tune insulin analysis methods, measurement traceability, and any conversion factor used in post‐analysis steps in accordance with the necessity for standardization.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9279959
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92799592022-07-15 Measurement comparability of insulin assays using conventional immunoassay kits Rosli, Nordiana Kwon, Ha‐Jeong Lim, Jinsook Yoon, Young Ahn Jeong, Ji‐Seon J Clin Lab Anal Research Articles BACKGROUND: The standardization of measurement aims to achieve comparability of results regardless of the analytical methods and the laboratory where analyses are carried out. In this paper, a comparison of results from several immunoassay‐based insulin analysis kits is described, and the steps necessary to improve comparability are discussed. METHODS: Four manual enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kits produced by Mercodia, Alpco, Epitope Diagnostics, and Abcam, and three automated chemiluminescent (CLIA) insulin assay kits (Siemens Centaur XP, Unicel Dxl800, Cobas e801) were compared by analyzing human serum samples and certified reference materials for human insulin. RESULTS: The seven evaluated assay kits showed substantial discrepancies in the results, with relative standard deviation ranges between 1.7% and 23.2%. We find that the traceability chains and the unit conversion factors are not yet harmonized, and current reference materials for insulin are not applicable for immunoassay‐based method validation due to the use of different matrices. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest the need to fine tune insulin analysis methods, measurement traceability, and any conversion factor used in post‐analysis steps in accordance with the necessity for standardization. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-05-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9279959/ /pubmed/35622611 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.24521 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Rosli, Nordiana
Kwon, Ha‐Jeong
Lim, Jinsook
Yoon, Young Ahn
Jeong, Ji‐Seon
Measurement comparability of insulin assays using conventional immunoassay kits
title Measurement comparability of insulin assays using conventional immunoassay kits
title_full Measurement comparability of insulin assays using conventional immunoassay kits
title_fullStr Measurement comparability of insulin assays using conventional immunoassay kits
title_full_unstemmed Measurement comparability of insulin assays using conventional immunoassay kits
title_short Measurement comparability of insulin assays using conventional immunoassay kits
title_sort measurement comparability of insulin assays using conventional immunoassay kits
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9279959/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35622611
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.24521
work_keys_str_mv AT roslinordiana measurementcomparabilityofinsulinassaysusingconventionalimmunoassaykits
AT kwonhajeong measurementcomparabilityofinsulinassaysusingconventionalimmunoassaykits
AT limjinsook measurementcomparabilityofinsulinassaysusingconventionalimmunoassaykits
AT yoonyoungahn measurementcomparabilityofinsulinassaysusingconventionalimmunoassaykits
AT jeongjiseon measurementcomparabilityofinsulinassaysusingconventionalimmunoassaykits