Sažetak
Aim: To compare four automated immunoassays for the measurement of vit25OHD and to assess the impact on the results obtained from a healthy population.
Methods: We analysed 100 serum samples on Unicel DxI 800 (Beckman Coulter), Architect i1000 (Abbott), Cobas e411 (Roche) and Liaison XL (DiaSorin). A Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the different methods’ values and method comparison was further performed using Spearman’s rank correlation, as well as linear and Passing-Bablok regression. In order to clinically categorise the obtained values, results were categorised into the following groups: 0–25 nmol/l, 25–50 nmol/l, 50–75 nmol/l and above 75 nmol/l and compared. The percentage of samples below 75 nmol/l and below 50 nmol/l was then calculated for every method.
Results: According to paired comparisons, each method differs from others (P<0.0001) except Cobas vs. Architect, which do not show a statistically significant difference (P=0.39). The strongest correlation was found between Liaison and Architect (r=0.94, P<0.0001). The percentage of samples below the reference value of 75 nmol/l were: 70% (Abbott), 92% (Liaison), 71% (Cobas) and 89% (Unicel). The percentage of samples below the value of 50 nmol/l were: 17% (Abbott), 55% (Liaison), 28% (Cobas) and 47% (Unicel).
Conclusion: The observed differences stem from the use of different analytical systems for vit25OHD concentration analysis and can result in different clinical outcomes. The reference ranges should be established for each assay in accordance with data provided by the manufacturer or in the laboratory, in accordance with proper standardisation.
Ključne reči
Reference
The published articles will be distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY). It is allowed to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and remix, transform, and build upon it for any purpose, even commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given to the original author(s), a link to the license is provided and it is indicated if changes were made. Users are required to provide full bibliographic description of the original publication (authors, article title, journal title, volume, issue, pages), as well as its DOI code. In electronic publishing, users are also required to link the content with both the original article published in Journal of Medical Biochemistry and the licence used.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.