A comparison between two different automated total 25-hydroxyvitamin D immunoassay methods using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

采用液相色谱-串联质谱法比较两种不同的自动化总25-羟基维生素D免疫测定方法

阅读:2

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Total 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] is the most reliable indicator of vitamin D status. In this study, we compared two automated immunoassay methods, the Abbott Architect 25-OH Vitamin D assay and the Roche Cobas Vitamin D total assay, with the liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred venous blood samples were randomly selected from routine vitamin D tests. Two of the serum aliquots were analyzed at the Abbott Architect i2000 and the Roche Cobas 6000's module e601 in our laboratory within the same day. The other serum aliquots were analyzed at the LC-MS/MS in different laboratory. Passing-Bablok regression analysis and Bland-Altman plot were used to compare methods. Inter-rater agreement was analyzed using kappa (κ) analysis. RESULTS: The Roche assay showed acceptable agreement with the LC-MS/MS based on Passing-Bablok analysis (intercept: -5.23 nmol/L, 95% CI: -8.73 to 0.19; slope: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.15). The Abbott assay showed proportional (slope: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.85) and constant differences (intercept: 17.08 nmol/L; 95% CI: 12.98 to 21.39). A mean bias of 15.1% was observed for the Abbott and a mean bias of -14.1% was observed for the Roche based on the Bland-Altman plots. We found strong to nearly perfect agreement in vitamin D status between the immunoassays and LC-MS/MS. (κ: 0.83 for Abbott, κ: 0.93 for Roche) using kappa analysis. CONCLUSION: Both immunoassays demonstrated acceptable performance, but the Roche Cobas assay demonstrated better performance than the Abbott Architect in the studied samples.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。