Abstract
(1)H-NMR metabolomics data is increasingly used to track health and disease. Nightingale Health, a major supplier of (1)H-NMR metabolomics, has recently updated the quantification strategy to further align with clinical standards. Such updates, however, might influence backward replicability, particularly affecting studies with repeated measures. Using data from BBMRI-NL consortium (~28,000 samples from 28 cohorts), we compared Nightingale data, originally released in 2014 and 2016, with a re-quantified version released in 2020, of which both versions were based on the same NMR spectra. Apart from two discontinued and twenty-three new analytes, we generally observe a high concordance between quantification versions with 73 out of 222 (33%) analytes showing a mean ρ > 0.9 across all cohorts. Conversely, five analytes consistently showed lower Spearman's correlations (ρ < 0.7) between versions, namely acetoacetate, LDL-L, saturated fatty acids, S-HDL-C, and sphingomyelins. Furthermore, previously trained multi-analyte scores, such as MetaboAge or MetaboHealth, might be particularly sensitive to platform changes. Whereas MetaboHealth replicated well, the MetaboAge score had to be retrained due to use of discontinued analytes. Notably, both scores in the re-quantified data recapitulated mortality associations observed previously. Concluding, we urge caution in utilizing different platform versions to avoid mixing analytes, having different units, or simply being discontinued.