TY - JOUR
T1 - Limitations of platform assays to measure serum 25OHD level impact on guidelines and practice decision making
AU - Rahme, Maya
AU - Al-Shaar, Laila
AU - Singh, Ravinder
AU - Baddoura, Rafic
AU - Halaby, Georges
AU - Arabi, Asma
AU - Habib, Robert H.
AU - Daher, Rose
AU - Bassil, Darina
AU - El-Ferkh, Karim
AU - Hoteit, Maha
AU - El-Hajj Fuleihan, Ghada
N1 - Funding Information:
The study was funded by the American University of Beirut, St. Joseph University, the Lebanese National Council for Scientific Research, and the National Institutes of Health, Fogarty International Center and the Office of Dietary Supplements D43 TW009118.
Funding Information:
The study was funded by the American University of Beirut , St. Joseph University , the Lebanese National Council for Scientific Research , and the National Institutes of Health , Fogarty International Center and the Office of Dietary Supplements D43 TW009118 .
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2018/12
Y1 - 2018/12
N2 - Context: Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectroscopy (LC-MS/MS) is the preferred method to measure 25 hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) levels, but laboratories are increasingly adopting automated platform assays. Objective: We assessed the performance of commonly used automated immunoassays, with that of LC-MS/MS, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) reference values, to measure 25OHD levels. Methods/Setting: We compared serum 25OHD levels obtained from 219 elderly subjects, enrolled in a vitamin D trial, using the Diasorin Liaison platform assay, and the tandem LC-MS/MS method. We also assessed the performance of the Diasorin and Roche automated assays, expressed as mean % bias from the NIST standards, based on the vitamin D External Quality Assessment Scheme (DEQAS) reports, from 2013 to 2017. Results: Serum 25OHD levels were significantly lower in the Diasorin compared to LC-MS/MS assay at baseline, 18.5 ± 7.8 vs 20.5 ± 7.6 ng/ml (p < 0.001), and all other time points. Diasorin (25OHD) = 0.76 × LC-MS/MS (25OHD) + 4.3, R 2 = 0.596. The absolute bias was independent of 25OHD values, and the pattern unfit for any cross-calibration. The proportion of subjects considered for vitamin D treatment based on pre-set cut-offs differed significantly between the 2 assays. There also was wide variability in the performance of both automated assays, compared to NIST reference values. Conclusion: The performance of most widely used automated assays is sub-optimal. Our findings underscore the pressing need to re-consider current practices with regard to 25OHD measurements, interpretation of results from research studies, meta-analyses, the development of vitamin D guidelines, and their relevance to optimizing health.
AB - Context: Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectroscopy (LC-MS/MS) is the preferred method to measure 25 hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) levels, but laboratories are increasingly adopting automated platform assays. Objective: We assessed the performance of commonly used automated immunoassays, with that of LC-MS/MS, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) reference values, to measure 25OHD levels. Methods/Setting: We compared serum 25OHD levels obtained from 219 elderly subjects, enrolled in a vitamin D trial, using the Diasorin Liaison platform assay, and the tandem LC-MS/MS method. We also assessed the performance of the Diasorin and Roche automated assays, expressed as mean % bias from the NIST standards, based on the vitamin D External Quality Assessment Scheme (DEQAS) reports, from 2013 to 2017. Results: Serum 25OHD levels were significantly lower in the Diasorin compared to LC-MS/MS assay at baseline, 18.5 ± 7.8 vs 20.5 ± 7.6 ng/ml (p < 0.001), and all other time points. Diasorin (25OHD) = 0.76 × LC-MS/MS (25OHD) + 4.3, R 2 = 0.596. The absolute bias was independent of 25OHD values, and the pattern unfit for any cross-calibration. The proportion of subjects considered for vitamin D treatment based on pre-set cut-offs differed significantly between the 2 assays. There also was wide variability in the performance of both automated assays, compared to NIST reference values. Conclusion: The performance of most widely used automated assays is sub-optimal. Our findings underscore the pressing need to re-consider current practices with regard to 25OHD measurements, interpretation of results from research studies, meta-analyses, the development of vitamin D guidelines, and their relevance to optimizing health.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053831191&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053831191&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.metabol.2018.09.003
DO - 10.1016/j.metabol.2018.09.003
M3 - Article
C2 - 30227144
AN - SCOPUS:85053831191
SN - 0026-0495
VL - 89
SP - 1
EP - 7
JO - Metabolism: Clinical and Experimental
JF - Metabolism: Clinical and Experimental
ER -