Diagnosis of α-1-antitrypsin deficiency: An algorithm of quantification, genotyping, and phenotyping

Melissa R. Snyder, Jerry A. Katzmann, Malinda L. Butz, Ping Yang, D. Brian Dawson, Kevin C. Halling, W Edward Jr. Highsmith, Stephen N Thibodeau

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

74 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Laboratory testing in suspected α-1-antitrypsin (A1AT) deficiency involves analysis of A1AT concentrations and identification of specific alleles by genotyping or phenotyping. The purpose of this study was to define and evaluate a strategy that provides reliable laboratory evaluation of A1AT deficiency. Methods: Samples from 512 individuals referred for A1AT phenotype analysis were analyzed by quantification, phenotype, and genotype. A1AT concentrations were measured by nephelometry. Phenotype analysis was performed by isoelectric focusing electrophoresis. The genotype assay detected the S and Z deficiency alleles by a melting curve analysis. Results: Of the 512 samples analyzed, 2% of the phenotype and genotype results were discordant. Among these 10 discordant results, 7 were attributed to phenotyping errors. On the basis of these data we formulated an algorithm, according to which we analyzed samples by genotyping and quantification assays, with a reflex to phenotyping when the genotype and quantification results were not concordant. Retrospective analyses demonstrated that 4% of samples submitted for genotype and quantitative analysis were reflexed to phenotyping. Of the reflexed samples, phenotyping confirmed the genotype result in 85% of cases. In the remaining 15%, phenotyping provided further information, including identifying rare deficiency alleles and suggesting the presence of a null allele, and allowed for a more definitive interpretation of the genotype result. Conclusions: The combination of genotyping and quantification, with a reflex to phenotyping, is the optimal strategy for the laboratory evaluation of A1AT deficiency.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2236-2242
Number of pages7
JournalClinical Chemistry
Volume52
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2006

Fingerprint

Genotype
Assays
Reflex
Alleles
Phenotype
Electrophoresis
Melting
Nephelometry and Turbidimetry
Testing
Chemical analysis
Isoelectric Focusing
Freezing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Biochemistry

Cite this

Diagnosis of α-1-antitrypsin deficiency : An algorithm of quantification, genotyping, and phenotyping. / Snyder, Melissa R.; Katzmann, Jerry A.; Butz, Malinda L.; Yang, Ping; Dawson, D. Brian; Halling, Kevin C.; Highsmith, W Edward Jr.; Thibodeau, Stephen N.

In: Clinical Chemistry, Vol. 52, No. 12, 12.2006, p. 2236-2242.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Snyder, Melissa R. ; Katzmann, Jerry A. ; Butz, Malinda L. ; Yang, Ping ; Dawson, D. Brian ; Halling, Kevin C. ; Highsmith, W Edward Jr. ; Thibodeau, Stephen N. / Diagnosis of α-1-antitrypsin deficiency : An algorithm of quantification, genotyping, and phenotyping. In: Clinical Chemistry. 2006 ; Vol. 52, No. 12. pp. 2236-2242.
@article{f9c7fb412b1a49b0a25de0a92e5fddad,
title = "Diagnosis of α-1-antitrypsin deficiency: An algorithm of quantification, genotyping, and phenotyping",
abstract = "Background: Laboratory testing in suspected α-1-antitrypsin (A1AT) deficiency involves analysis of A1AT concentrations and identification of specific alleles by genotyping or phenotyping. The purpose of this study was to define and evaluate a strategy that provides reliable laboratory evaluation of A1AT deficiency. Methods: Samples from 512 individuals referred for A1AT phenotype analysis were analyzed by quantification, phenotype, and genotype. A1AT concentrations were measured by nephelometry. Phenotype analysis was performed by isoelectric focusing electrophoresis. The genotype assay detected the S and Z deficiency alleles by a melting curve analysis. Results: Of the 512 samples analyzed, 2{\%} of the phenotype and genotype results were discordant. Among these 10 discordant results, 7 were attributed to phenotyping errors. On the basis of these data we formulated an algorithm, according to which we analyzed samples by genotyping and quantification assays, with a reflex to phenotyping when the genotype and quantification results were not concordant. Retrospective analyses demonstrated that 4{\%} of samples submitted for genotype and quantitative analysis were reflexed to phenotyping. Of the reflexed samples, phenotyping confirmed the genotype result in 85{\%} of cases. In the remaining 15{\%}, phenotyping provided further information, including identifying rare deficiency alleles and suggesting the presence of a null allele, and allowed for a more definitive interpretation of the genotype result. Conclusions: The combination of genotyping and quantification, with a reflex to phenotyping, is the optimal strategy for the laboratory evaluation of A1AT deficiency.",
author = "Snyder, {Melissa R.} and Katzmann, {Jerry A.} and Butz, {Malinda L.} and Ping Yang and Dawson, {D. Brian} and Halling, {Kevin C.} and Highsmith, {W Edward Jr.} and Thibodeau, {Stephen N}",
year = "2006",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1373/clinchem.2006.072991",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "52",
pages = "2236--2242",
journal = "Clinical Chemistry",
issn = "0009-9147",
publisher = "American Association for Clinical Chemistry Inc.",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Diagnosis of α-1-antitrypsin deficiency

T2 - An algorithm of quantification, genotyping, and phenotyping

AU - Snyder, Melissa R.

AU - Katzmann, Jerry A.

AU - Butz, Malinda L.

AU - Yang, Ping

AU - Dawson, D. Brian

AU - Halling, Kevin C.

AU - Highsmith, W Edward Jr.

AU - Thibodeau, Stephen N

PY - 2006/12

Y1 - 2006/12

N2 - Background: Laboratory testing in suspected α-1-antitrypsin (A1AT) deficiency involves analysis of A1AT concentrations and identification of specific alleles by genotyping or phenotyping. The purpose of this study was to define and evaluate a strategy that provides reliable laboratory evaluation of A1AT deficiency. Methods: Samples from 512 individuals referred for A1AT phenotype analysis were analyzed by quantification, phenotype, and genotype. A1AT concentrations were measured by nephelometry. Phenotype analysis was performed by isoelectric focusing electrophoresis. The genotype assay detected the S and Z deficiency alleles by a melting curve analysis. Results: Of the 512 samples analyzed, 2% of the phenotype and genotype results were discordant. Among these 10 discordant results, 7 were attributed to phenotyping errors. On the basis of these data we formulated an algorithm, according to which we analyzed samples by genotyping and quantification assays, with a reflex to phenotyping when the genotype and quantification results were not concordant. Retrospective analyses demonstrated that 4% of samples submitted for genotype and quantitative analysis were reflexed to phenotyping. Of the reflexed samples, phenotyping confirmed the genotype result in 85% of cases. In the remaining 15%, phenotyping provided further information, including identifying rare deficiency alleles and suggesting the presence of a null allele, and allowed for a more definitive interpretation of the genotype result. Conclusions: The combination of genotyping and quantification, with a reflex to phenotyping, is the optimal strategy for the laboratory evaluation of A1AT deficiency.

AB - Background: Laboratory testing in suspected α-1-antitrypsin (A1AT) deficiency involves analysis of A1AT concentrations and identification of specific alleles by genotyping or phenotyping. The purpose of this study was to define and evaluate a strategy that provides reliable laboratory evaluation of A1AT deficiency. Methods: Samples from 512 individuals referred for A1AT phenotype analysis were analyzed by quantification, phenotype, and genotype. A1AT concentrations were measured by nephelometry. Phenotype analysis was performed by isoelectric focusing electrophoresis. The genotype assay detected the S and Z deficiency alleles by a melting curve analysis. Results: Of the 512 samples analyzed, 2% of the phenotype and genotype results were discordant. Among these 10 discordant results, 7 were attributed to phenotyping errors. On the basis of these data we formulated an algorithm, according to which we analyzed samples by genotyping and quantification assays, with a reflex to phenotyping when the genotype and quantification results were not concordant. Retrospective analyses demonstrated that 4% of samples submitted for genotype and quantitative analysis were reflexed to phenotyping. Of the reflexed samples, phenotyping confirmed the genotype result in 85% of cases. In the remaining 15%, phenotyping provided further information, including identifying rare deficiency alleles and suggesting the presence of a null allele, and allowed for a more definitive interpretation of the genotype result. Conclusions: The combination of genotyping and quantification, with a reflex to phenotyping, is the optimal strategy for the laboratory evaluation of A1AT deficiency.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33845536840&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33845536840&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1373/clinchem.2006.072991

DO - 10.1373/clinchem.2006.072991

M3 - Article

C2 - 17053153

AN - SCOPUS:33845536840

VL - 52

SP - 2236

EP - 2242

JO - Clinical Chemistry

JF - Clinical Chemistry

SN - 0009-9147

IS - 12

ER -