Medizinische Universität Graz Austria/Österreich - Forschungsportal - Medical University of Graz
Gewählte Publikation:
SHR Neuro Krebs Kardio Lipid Stoffw Microb
Schmid, J; Kienreich, K; Gaksch, M; Grubler, M; Raggam, R; Meinitzer, A; Rutters, F; Dekker, JM; Marz, W; Verheyen, N; Tomaschitz, A; Pilz, S; .
The importance of assays in vitamin D status classification: a comparison of four automated 25-hydroxyvitamin D immunoassays.
LABORATORIUMSMEDIZIN. 2013; 37(5): 261-268.
Doi: 10.1515/labmed-2012-0074
Web of Science
FullText
FullText_MUG
- Führende Autor*innen der Med Uni Graz
- Pilz Stefan
- Schmid Johannes
- Co-Autor*innen der Med Uni Graz
- Grübler Martin
- Keppel Martin
- Kienreich Katharina
- März Winfried
- Meinitzer Andreas
- Raggam Reinhard Bernd
- Tomaschitz Andreas
- Verheyen Nicolas Dominik
- Altmetrics:
- Dimensions Citations:
- Plum Analytics:
- Scite (citation analytics):
- Abstract:
- Background: Owing to a growing interest in vitamin D, there has been an increasing demand for 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH] D) measurements over the past few years warranting a critical evaluation of laboratory methods for 25(OH) D determinations. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare four of the most frequently used routine assays for 25(OH) D. Methods: In 106 hypertensive patients (53 +/- 14 years; 59% females), derived from the Graz Endocrine Causes of Hypertension (GECOH) study, we measured 25(OH) D in serum and plasma by means of four automated immunoassays (DiaSorin Liaison, IDS iSYS, Abbott ARCHITECT, and Roche Cobas). Results: We observed a poor comparability between assay results with Pearson correlation coefficients between the different methods ranging from 0.57 to 0.85. Using a value of <= 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L) as the cut-off for vitamin D deficiency, the percentages of vitamin D deficient patients was significantly different depending on the assay method: 79.2% (Abbott ARCHITECT), 50.0% (DiaSorin Liaison), 28.3% (IDS iSYS), and 23.6% (Roche Cobas). Conclusions: By comparing four frequently used automated immunoassays for 25(OH) D, we observed remarkable differences with a significant impact on vitamin D status classification. Clinicians and researchers must be aware of these assay differences and must aim for standardization of 25(OH) D measurements.
- Find related publications in this database (Keywords)
- assay
- laboratory
- measurement
- method
- vitamin D
- 25(OH)D