These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The recognition of 25-hydroxyvitamin D2 and D3 by a new binding protein based 25-hydroxyvitamin D assay.
    Author: Su Z, Slay BR, Carr R, Zhu Y.
    Journal: Clin Chim Acta; 2013 Feb 18; 417():62-6. PubMed ID: 23266769.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The circulating form of vitamin D, 25-Hydroxyvitamin D (25-OHD), is commonly measured in clinical labs to evaluate vitamin D status of an individual. Vitamin D exists in 2 major forms: vitamin D3 and D2. Current methodologies for 25-OHD testing include antibody or vitamin D binding protein based assays, HPLC, and LC-MS. Although most current antibody or vitamin D binding protein based assays claim that they measure 25-OHD3 and 25-OHD2 equally, bias may still exist in the measurement of total 25-OHD when high concentration of 25-OHD2 is present. LC-MS/MS can measure 25-OHD3 and 25-OHD2 separately. We determined the ability of a new competitive protein binding assay (CPBA) to recognize 25-OHD2 and 25-OHD3 by comparing it with an LC-MS/MS method. METHODS: Seventy-one serum samples were collected and divided into 3 groups according to 25-OHD2 and 25-OHD3 concentrations determined by LC-MS/MS: group A containing only 25-OHD3 (25-OHD2<3ng/ml), group B containing both 25-OHD3 and 25-OHD2 (25-OHD2≥3ng/ml, 25-OHD3≥10ng/ml), and group C containing mainly 25-OHD2 (25-OHD3<10ng/ml). The correlation between total 25-OHD concentrations measured by LC-MS/MS and CPBA was analyzed with linear regression analysis and the difference between the two methods was analyzed with paired, 2-tailed Student's t-Test. The biases between the two methods were also calculated. RESULTS: The correlation analysis between LC-MS/MS (x) and CPBA (y) in the 3 groups are as follows: y=1.13x-1.01 (R(2)=0.65, n=25) in group A; y=0.68x+4.02 (R(2)=0.76, n=31) in group B, and y=0.49x+6.53 (R(2)=0.38, n=15) in group C. In group A, the mean total 25-OHD measured with CPBA was higher than that with LC-MS/MS, while in groups B, CPBA results were lower, but the differences were not statistically significant (p=0.476 for group A and 0.059 for group B). In group C, the mean 25-OHD measured with CPBA was lower than that with LC-MS/MS and the difference was statistically significant (p=0.002). The average biases in total 25-OHD concentrations between LC-MS/MS and CPBA were 10.8%, -23.6%, and -38.4% for groups A, B, and C, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CPBA has a better correlation with LC-MS/MS for samples containing both 25-OHD2 and 25-OHD3 as compared to samples with mainly 25-OHD2 or 25-OHD3 only. However, it measures 25-OHD3 more accurately than 25-OHD2. Compared to LC-MS/MS, CPBA overestimates 25-OHD3, but underestimates 25-OHD2.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]