Implementation of automated testing for 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D: Return of experience from a core-laboratory

Miller, Nathalie; Gruson, Damien

doi:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2015.10.017

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This position is supported by the large percentage of deviation of several samples from the mean of the two methods in the present investigation. Other recent comparison studies between the automated DiaSorin method and LC-MS/MS show far better performances [ 19 – 21 ]. Correlation coefficients between the automated method and LC-MS/MS of 0.92 to 0.998 have been reported [ 19 – 21 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other recent comparison studies between the automated DiaSorin method and LC-MS/MS show far better performances [ 19 – 21 ]. Correlation coefficients between the automated method and LC-MS/MS of 0.92 to 0.998 have been reported [ 19 – 21 ]. However, such high correlation coefficients are highly questionable, at least in routine practice settings in clinical laboratories, due to imprecision in sample purification, separation, and measurement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measurement of Circulating 1,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D: Comparison of an Automated Method with a Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method

Zittermann

Ernst

Becker

et al. 2016

International Journal of Analytical Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. The clinical relevance of circulating 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) is probably underappreciated, but variations in the measurement of this difficult analyte between different methods limit comparison of results. Methods. In 129 clinical samples, we compared a new automated assay with a commercially available liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) kit. Results. Median (interquartile range) 1,25(OH)2D concentrations with the automated assay and the LC-MS/MS method were 26.6 pg/mL (18.5–39.0 pg/mL) and 23.6 pg/mL (16.1–31.3 pg/mL), respectively (P = 0.001). Using the method-specific cut-offs for deficient 1,25(OH)2D levels (<20 pg/mL for the automated assay and <17 pg/mL for the LC-MS/MS method), the percentage of patients classified as 1,25(OH)2D deficient was 28.7% and 27.1%, respectively. However, concordance between the two methods for deficient levels was only 62% and the concordance correlation coefficient was poor (0.534). The regression equation resulted in an intercept of −1.99 (95% CI: −7.33–1.31) and a slope of 1.27 (95% CI: 1.04–1.52) for the automated assay. The mean bias with respect to the mean of the two methods was −3.8 (1.96 SD: −28.3–20.8) pg/mL for the LC-MS/MS method minus the automated assay. Conclusions. The two methods show only modest correlation and further standardization is required to improve reliability and comparability of 1,25(OH)2D test procedures.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement of Circulating 1,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D: Comparison of an Automated Method with a Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method

Zittermann

Ernst

Becker

et al. 2016

International Journal of Analytical Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Without the presence of a reference method, identifying the methods that deviate is very difficult, if not impossible. A recently developed automated immunoassay shows good correlations to some of the LC-MS/MS methods that include an immunopurification step in their sample preparation, while lesser correlations are found with others that do not [ 82 , 83 , 84 ]. LC-MS/MS methods without immunopurification included in their sample preparation might suffer from isobaric interferences, such as 1β-25-dihydroxyvitamin D 3 , which would not be co-captured by the antibodies in the automated immunoassay [ 85 ].…”

Section: How: Importance Of the Choice Of Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The When, What & How of Measuring Vitamin D Metabolism in Clinical Medicine

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We now have the ability to measure a number of different vitamin D metabolites with very accurate methods. The most abundant vitamin D metabolite, 25-hydroxyvitamin D, is currently the best marker for overall vitamin D status and is therefore most commonly measured in clinical medicine. The added value of measuring metabolites beyond 25-hydroxyvitamin D, like 1,25-, and 24,25-dihydroxyvitamin D is not broadly appreciated. Yet, in some more complicated cases, these metabolites may provide just the information needed for a legitimate diagnosis. The problem at present, is knowing when to measure, what to measure and how to measure. For 25-hydroxyvitamin D, the most frequently used automated immunoassays do not meet the requirements of today’s standards for certain patient groups and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry is the desired method of choice in these individuals. The less frequently measured 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D metabolite enables us to identify a number of conditions, including 1α-hydroxylase deficiency, hereditary vitamin D-resistant rickets and a number of granulomatous diseases or lymphoproliferative diseases accompanied by hypercalcaemia. Furthermore, it discriminates between the FGF23-mediated and non-FGF23-mediated hypophosphatemic syndromes. The 24,25-dihydroxyvitamin D metabolite has proven its value in the diagnosis of idiopathic infantile hypercalcaemia and has the potential of having value in identifying other diseases. For both metabolites, the understanding of the origin of differences between assays is limited and requires further attention. Nonetheless, in every way, appropriate measurement of vitamin D metabolism in the clinical laboratory hinges eminently on the comprehension of the value of the different metabolites, and the importance of the choice of method.

show abstract

Vitamin D Testing—Where Are We and What Is on the Horizon?

Heureux¹

2017

Advances in Clinical Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implementation of automated testing for 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D: Return of experience from a core-laboratory

Cited by 5 publications

References 15 publications

Measurement of Circulating 1,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D: Comparison of an Automated Method with a Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method

Measurement of Circulating 1,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D: Comparison of an Automated Method with a Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method

The When, What & How of Measuring Vitamin D Metabolism in Clinical Medicine

Vitamin D Testing—Where Are We and What Is on the Horizon?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About