Background: The national programs for the harmonization of hemoglobin (Hb)A1c measurements in the US [National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP)], Japan [Japanese Diabetes Society (JDS)/Japanese Society of Clinical Chemistry (JSCC)], and Sweden are based on different designated comparison methods (DCMs). The future basis for international standardization will be the reference system developed by the IFCC Working Group on HbA1c Standardization. The aim of the present study was to determine the relationships between the IFCC Reference Method (RM) and the DCMs. Methods: Four method-comparison studies were performed in 2001–2003. In each study five to eight pooled blood samples were measured by 11 reference laboratories of the IFCC Network of Reference Laboratories, 9 Secondary Reference Laboratories of the NGSP, 3 reference laboratories of the JDS/JSCC program, and a Swedish reference laboratory. Regression equations were determined for the relationship between the IFCC RM and each of the DCMs. Results: Significant differences were observed between the HbA1c results of the IFCC RM and those of the DCMs. Significant differences were also demonstrated between the three DCMs. However, in all cases the relationship of the DCMs with the RM were linear. There were no statistically significant differences between the regression equations calculated for each of the four studies; therefore, the results could be combined. The relationship is described by the following regression equations: NGSP-HbA1c = 0.915(IFCC-HbA1c) + 2.15% (r2 = 0.998); JDS/JSCC-HbA1c = 0.927(IFCC-HbA1c) + 1.73% (r2 = 0.997); Swedish-HbA1c = 0.989(IFCC-HbA1c) + 0.88% (r2 = 0.996). Conclusion: There is a firm and reproducible link between the IFCC RM and DCM HbA1c values.

HbA1C is the stable glucose adduct to the N-terminal group of the beta-chain of HbA0. The measurement of HbA1c in human blood is most important for the long-term control of the glycaemic state in diabetic patients. Because there was no internationally agreed reference method the IFCC Working Group on HbA1c Standardization developed a reference method which is here described. In a first step haemoglobin is cleaved into peptides by the enzyme endoproteinase Glu-C, and in a second step the glycated and non-glycated N-terminal hexapeptides of the beta-chain obtained are separated and quantified by HPLC and electrospray ionisation mass spectrometry or in a two-dimensional approach using HPLC and capillary electrophoresis with UV-detection. Both principles give identical results. HbA1c is measured as ratio between the glycated and non-glycated hexapeptides. Calibrators consisting of mixtures of highly purified HbA1c and HbA0 are used. The analytical performance of the reference method has been evaluated by an international network of reference laboratories comprising laboratories from Europe, Japan and the USA. The intercomparison studies of the network showed excellent results with intra-laboratory CVs of 0.5 to 2% and inter-laboratory CVs of 1.4 to 2.3%. Possible interferences have been carefully investigated. Due to the higher specificity of the reference method the results are lower than those generated with most of the present commercial methods which currently are calibrated with unspecific designated comparison methods. The new reference method has been approved by the member societies of the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine and will be the basis for the future uniform standardization of HbA1c routine assays worldwide.

The increase in haemoglobin (Hb)A(2) level is the most significant parameter in the identification of beta thalassaemia carriers. However, in some cases the level of HbA(2) is not typically elevated and some difficulties may arise in making the diagnosis. For these reasons the quantification of HbA(2) has to be performed with great accuracy and the results must be interpreted together with other haematological and biochemical evidence. The present document includes comments on the need for accuracy and standardisation, and on the interpretation of the HbA(2) value, reviewing the most crucial aspects related to this test. A practical flow-chart is presented to summarise the significance of HbA(2) estimation in different thalassaemia syndromes and related haemoglobinopathies.

Background: The IFCC Reference Measurement System for hemoglobin (Hb)A1c (IFCC-RM) has been developed within the framework of metrologic traceability and is embedded in a network of 14 reference laboratories. This paper describes the outcome of 12 intercomparison studies (periodic evaluations to control essential elements of the IFCC-RM). Methods: Each study included: unknown samples (to test individual network laboratories); known samples (controls); recently manufactured calibrators (to check calculated assigned value); stored calibrators (to test stability) and a calibration-set (to calibrate the IFCC-RM). The unknown samples are measured by use of the IFCC-RM and the designated comparison methods [DCMs; the National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP) in the US, Japanese Diabetes Society/Japanese Society for Clinical Chemistry (JDS/JSCC) in Japan, and Mono-S in Sweden] are used to investigate the stability of the Master Equation (ME), the relationship between IFCC-RM and DCMs. Results: A total of 105 IFCC-RM data sets were evaluated: 95 were approved, 5 were not, and for 5 no data were submitted. Trend analysis of the MEs, expressed as change in percentage HbA1c per year, revealed 0.000% (NGSP, not significant), −0.030%, (JDS/JSCC; significant) and −0.016% (Mono-S; not significant). Evaluation of long-term performance revealed no systematic change over time; 2 laboratories showed significant bias, 1 poor reproducibility. The mean HbA1c determined by laboratories performing mass spectrometry (MS) was the same as the mean determined by laboratories using capillary electrophoresis (CE), but the reproducibility at laboratories using CE was better. One batch of new calibrators was not approved. All stored calibrators were stable. Conclusion: A sound reference system is in place to ensure continuity and stability of the analytical anchor for HbA1c.

No abstract

Although DNA analysis is needed for characterization of the mutations that cause b-thalassaemia, measurement of the Hb A 2 is essential for the routine identification of people who are carriers of b-thalassaemia. The methods of quantitating Hb A 2 are described together with pitfalls in undertaking these laboratory tests with particular emphasis on automated high-performance liquid chromatography and capillary electrophoresis.

Objective: The measurement of plasma glycated albumin is particularly useful in the short-middle term monitoring of glycometabolic control in diabetics. The aim of this work is to evaluate a new enzymatic method for the measurement of glycated albumin in plasma, with particular attention to some selected cases and comparison with other relevant tests (fasting plasma glucose, after glucose load, fructosamine, glycated hemoglobin).Design and methods: We have performed a multicenter study by which sample collection was performed in three different centers (Milano, Padova and Cagliari) and serum samples, frozen at −80°C, were then delivered under dry ice to the centralized laboratory in Milano. Glycated plasma albumin was measured with reagents from Asahi Kasei Pharma (Lucica GA-L enzymatic assay; AKP, Tokyo, Japan) on a Modular P Roche system. Fructosamine was assessed by a Roche method and HbA 1c (measured separately in the three centers on fresh EDTA blood) by DCCT-aligned HPLC systems. We have investigated 50 type 2 diabetics, 26 subjects with gestational diabetes, 35 subjects with thalassemia major, 10 subjects with cirrhosis, 23 patients with end-stage renal disease subjected to dialysis treatment and 32 healthy adult control subjects.Results: The main analytical performance characteristics of the new GA test were the following: (a) the within-assay reproducibility was between 3.0 and 3.9% (in terms of GA% CV, measured on 2 serum pools and 2 control materials at normal and pathological glycated albumin levels); (b) the between-assays reproducibility was from 2.8 to 4.1%; (c) the linearity was tested in the interval between 13 and 36% and found acceptable (r 2 = 0.9932). Concerning the clinical utility of the new test, we have evaluated the relationships between GA, HbA 1c , fructosamine and fasting and post-prandial glucose in several patients, as well as the changes in the abovementioned parameters in a sub-group of type 2 diabetic patients for 18 weeks as they progressed from severe hyperglycemia (HbA 1c ≥10.0%) toward a better glycemic control. The correlations between glycated albumin and HbA 1c were as follows: (a) type 2 diabetics: r 2 = 0.483 (good glycemic control), r 2 = 0.577 (poor control); (b) diabetic patients under dialysis: r 2 = 0.480; (c) liver disease: r 2 = 0.186; (d) transfused non-diabetics with thalassemia: r 2 = 0.004. Glycated albumin, as well as HbA 1c and fructosamine, was of little value in the study of women with gestational diabetes, mainly because of the very limited glucose fluctuations in this particular category of subjects. In 11 type 2 diabetic patients under poor metabolic control, GA was better correlated with fasting plasma glucose then HbA 1c (r 2 = 0.555 vs. 0.291, respectively), and decreased more rapidly than HbA 1c during intensive insulin therapy. Conclusions: The experience we have acquired with the new enzymatic test demonstrates its reproducibility and robustness. We confirm that plasma glycated albumin is better related to fasting plasma glucose with resp...

A large body of evidence attests that quality programs developed around the analytical phase of the total testing process would only produce limited improvements, since the large majority of errors encountered in clinical laboratories still prevails within extra-analytical areas of testing, especially in manually intensive preanalytical processes. Most preanalytical errors result from system flaws and insufficient audit of the operators involved in specimen collection and handling responsibilities, leading to an unacceptable number of unsuitable specimens due to misidentification, in vitro hemolysis, clotting, inappropriate volume, wrong container or contamination from infusive routes. Detection and management of unsuitable samples are necessary to overcome this variability. The present document, issued by the Italian Inter-society SIBioC-SIMeL-CISMEL (Society of Clinical Biochemistry and Clinical Molecular Biology-Italian Society of Laboratory Medicine-Italian Committee for Standardization of Hematological and Laboratory Methods) Study Group on Extra-analytical Variability, reviews the major causes of unsuitable specimens in clinical laboratories, providing consensus recommendations for detection and management.