» Articles » PMID: 26389085

Discrepancy Between Vitamin D Total Immunoassays Due to Various Cross-reactivities

Overview
Journal J Bone Metab
Date 2015 Sep 22
PMID 26389085
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to find out the cause of discrepancy between various automated immunoassays for 25-hydroxy-vitamin D (25-[OH]D).

Methods: National Institute of Standards & Technology Standard Reference Material (SRM) 972a is SRM for 25-(OH)D and consists of 4 vials of frozen serum with different concentrations of 25-(OH)D. Each concentration was measured 6 times in 3 different immunoassays: ADVIA Vitamin D Total assay (Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany), ARCHITECT 25-(OH)D (Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL, USA), and COBAS Vitamin D Total assay (Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland).

Results: When using the certified reference values of SRM 972a as it is, discarding the cross-reactivity of each immunoassay, for ADVIA, the coefficient of determination (R(2)) as a score of regression analysis was 0.8995 and maximal difference between measured value and certified reference value was 3.6 ng/mL in level 3. The R(2) and maximal differences of ARCHITECT were 0.5377 and 6.9 ng/mL, respectively, in level 4. Those of COBAS were 0.3674 and 22.3 ng/mL, respectively, in level 4. When considering cross-reactivities of each immunoassays to various 25-(OH)D metabolites, the ADVIA had R(2) and maximal difference of 0.9254 and 3.3 ng/mL, respectively, in level 3. For ARCHITECT, the R(2) and maximal differences were 0.7602 and 5.1 ng/mL, respectively, in level 1. Those of COBAS were 0.9284 and 4.9 ng/mL, respectively, in level 1.

Conclusions: The cause of discrepancies between vitamin D immunoassays was mainly on the difference in cross-reactivities to various vitamin D metabolites. The discrepancies can be considerably decreased by considering cross-reactivities of each immunoassay.

Citing Articles

An AuNPs-based electrochemical aptasensor for the detection of 25-hydroxy vitamin D.

Cai T, Chen M, Yang J, Tang C, Lu X, Wei Z Anal Sci. 2024; 40(4):599-607.

PMID: 38190076 DOI: 10.1007/s44211-023-00489-0.


Vitamin D and Its Metabolites Status before and during Chemotherapy in Caucasian Breast Cancer Patients.

Kimsa-Furdzik M, Bednarek A, Hibner G, Czajka-Francuz P, Cison-Jurek S, Karawasiecka D Metabolites. 2023; 13(9).

PMID: 37755276 PMC: 10534610. DOI: 10.3390/metabo13090996.


A highly sensitive LC-MS/MS method for quantitative determination of 7 vitamin D metabolites in mouse brain tissue.

Stephenson A, Hunter B, Shaw P, Abu Kassim N, Trengove R, Takechi R Anal Bioanal Chem. 2023; 415(7):1357-1369.

PMID: 36705732 PMC: 9928823. DOI: 10.1007/s00216-023-04527-8.


pH assists simultaneous determination of folic acid and vitamin D in biological fluids using a novel Tb-acyclovir optical biosensor.

Alharthi S, Attia M, Abou-Omar M RSC Adv. 2022; 11(34):20865-20873.

PMID: 35479388 PMC: 9034052. DOI: 10.1039/d1ra02396a.


Graphene oxide and fluorescent aptamer based novel biosensor for detection of 25-hydroxyvitamin D.

Gupta R, Kaul S, Singh V, Kumar S, Singhal N Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):23456.

PMID: 34873222 PMC: 8649066. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-02837-4.


References
1.
Holick M . Vitamin D deficiency. N Engl J Med. 2007; 357(3):266-81. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra070553. View

2.
Meehan M, Penckofer S . The Role of Vitamin D in the Aging Adult. J Aging Gerontol. 2015; 2(2):60-71. PMC: 4399494. DOI: 10.12974/2309-6128.2014.02.02.1. View

3.
Forrest K, Stuhldreher W . Prevalence and correlates of vitamin D deficiency in US adults. Nutr Res. 2011; 31(1):48-54. DOI: 10.1016/j.nutres.2010.12.001. View

4.
Singh R, Taylor R, Reddy G, Grebe S . C-3 epimers can account for a significant proportion of total circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D in infants, complicating accurate measurement and interpretation of vitamin D status. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006; 91(8):3055-61. DOI: 10.1210/jc.2006-0710. View

5.
Michos E, Melamed M . Vitamin D and cardiovascular disease risk. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2007; 11(1):7-12. DOI: 10.1097/MCO.0b013e3282f2f4dd. View