Wiedmeyer Hsiao-Mei, Polonsky Kenneth S, Myers Gary L, Little Randie R, Greenbaum Carla J, Goldstein David E, Palmer Jerry P
Department of Pathology & Anatomical Sciences, University of Missouri-Columbia School of Medicine, Columbia, MO 65212, USA.
Clin Chem. 2007 Apr;53(4):784-7. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2006.081570. Epub 2007 Mar 1.
C-peptide measurement has been widely used as a marker of insulin secretion in patients with diabetes. We assessed the comparability of C-peptide results obtained with different methods and by different laboratories and determined whether C-peptide results could be harmonized by normalization with a WHO reference reagent or with plasma.
We sent 16 different heparin plasma samples to 15 laboratories in 7 countries. The samples were analyzed with 10 different assay methods. A WHO C-peptide standard was also sent to each laboratory and used to determine the feasibility of normalizing results. To assess the impact of calibrator matrix on the comparability of results, we also used the mean results of all laboratories for 4 of the samples to normalize the remaining sample results.
Between-laboratory variability increased with increasing C-peptide concentrations. Normalization of results with WHO reference reagents did not improve comparability, but normalization with samples significantly improved comparability among laboratories and methods. The 95% confidence interval estimate for the SD for the lab/method effect (0.0-0.061) using sample-normalized values did not overlap with the 95% CI estimate with the raw data (0.090-0.225).
C-peptide results generated by different methods and different laboratories do not always agree, especially at higher concentrations of C-peptide. These data support the concept of using a single laboratory for multisite studies and support efforts to harmonize C-peptide measurements by use of calibrators prepared in the sample matrix.
C肽测定已被广泛用作糖尿病患者胰岛素分泌的标志物。我们评估了不同方法和不同实验室获得的C肽结果的可比性,并确定是否可以通过使用世界卫生组织(WHO)参考试剂或血浆进行标准化来使C肽结果趋于一致。
我们将16份不同的肝素血浆样本发送到7个国家的15个实验室。这些样本采用10种不同的检测方法进行分析。还向每个实验室发送了一份WHO C肽标准品,并用于确定结果标准化的可行性。为了评估校准物基质对结果可比性的影响,我们还使用所有实验室对4个样本的平均结果来标准化其余样本的结果。
实验室间的变异性随C肽浓度的增加而增加。使用WHO参考试剂对结果进行标准化并不能提高可比性,但使用样本进行标准化可显著提高不同实验室和方法之间的可比性。使用样本标准化值时,实验室/方法效应标准差的95%置信区间估计(0.0 - 0.061)与原始数据的95%置信区间估计(0.090 - 0.225)不重叠。
不同方法和不同实验室产生的C肽结果并不总是一致的,尤其是在C肽浓度较高时。这些数据支持在多中心研究中使用单一实验室的概念,并支持通过使用在样本基质中制备的校准物来统一C肽测量的努力。