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: Improved Recognition of 25-Hydroxyvitamin D2 by 2 Automated Immunoassays.
    Author: Geno KA, Tolan NV, Singh RJ, Nerenz RD.
    Journal: J Appl Lab Med; 2020 Nov 01; 5(6):1287-1295. PubMed ID: 32529210.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Despite recommendations to limit vitamin D testing to specific clinical scenarios, test volume remains high in many clinical laboratories. Automated total vitamin D immunoassays frequently under- or over-recover 25-hydroxyvitamin D2 [25(OH)D2], making accurate assessment of vitamin D status difficult in patients taking high-dose 25(OH)D2 supplements. Mass spectrometry-based methods offer excellent recovery of 25(OH)D2 but are not practical for use in all laboratories. In this study, we evaluated 2 automated immunoassays against an LC-MS/MS method performed at a national reference laboratory. METHODS: A method comparison against LC-MS/MS was performed for the Roche Elecsys Vitamin D total II assay and the IDS-iSYS 25 VitDS immunoassays using 49 patient specimens submitted for clinical 25(OH)D measurement. Mean bias was calculated, and vitamin D status was determined for each specimen according to the 2011 Endocrine Society clinical practice guidelines. RESULTS: Theil-Sen regression lines relative to LC-MS/MS were y = 0.88x + 2.94 for Roche and y = 1.03x + 2.48 for IDS. Mean bias (±SD) in samples with 25(OH)D2 concentrations less than 5 ng/mL was -0.25 ng/mL (±6.30) for Roche and -1.45 ng/mL (±6.82) for the IDS. Mean bias (±SD) in samples with 25(OH)D2 concentrations greater than 5 ng/mL was -3.19 ng/mL (±6.61) for Roche and 5.52 ng/mL (±6.36) for IDS. Median percentage recovery of 25(OH)D2 was 87.1% (interquartile range 76.0-111.3) for Roche and 120.6% (interquartile range: 105.3-133.4) for IDS. Vitamin D status was misclassified in 7 samples by the Roche assay and 3 by the IDS assay. For all but one of the discordant pairs, the immunoassay result was within 1.7 ng/mL of the diagnostic cutoff. CONCLUSIONS: The automated immunoassays evaluated here demonstrate improved recovery of 25(OH)D2 relative to previous generations. Both are acceptable for use in the determination of vitamin D status.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]