Hyppönen Elina, Turner Steve, Cumberland Phillippa, Power Christine, Gibb Ian
Centre for Pediatric Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London WC1N 1EH, United Kingdom.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007 Dec;92(12):4615-22. doi: 10.1210/jc.2007-1279. Epub 2007 Aug 28.
An automated application of Immunodiagnostic Systems Limited (IDS) OCTEIA 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] enzyme immunoassay was developed for analyses of 25(OH)D in more than 7000 participants of the 1958 cohort. Variation between 25(OH)D assays hampers between-study comparisons and the definition of relevant cutoffs for hypovitaminosis D.
The objective of the study was to evaluate the importance of assay variation on the estimated prevalence of hypovitaminosis D and assess the use of statistical harmonization to overcome the observed differences.
Agreement analyses were performed between two commercial 25(OH)D assays (IDS enzyme immunoassay and Diasorin RIA), with validation using performance data from Vitamin D External Quality Assessment Scheme (DEQAS).
The study was conducted in England, Scotland, and Wales.
Members of the 1958 British birth cohort participated in the study.
25(OH)D was measured both by IDS and Diasorin RIA in 781 samples. Additional quality control data were obtained through participation in DEQAS (five distributions throughout the survey).
Average 25(OH)D concentrations by IDS were -15.7 and -13.7 nmol/liter lower, compared with Diasorin or DEQAS mean, respectively (both P < 0.0001). Graphical examination demonstrated a dose-related bias between IDS with Diasorin and DEQAS mean, but log transformation removed the bias. After using the log difference between the measurements as an adjustment factor, there were no differences in average 25(OH)D concentrations (P >or= 0.21 for comparison of IDS with Diasorin or DEQAS) and estimates for hypovitaminosis D obtained by IDS were similar to Diasorin.
Differences between assays have implications for public health messages about hypovitaminosis D. Harmonization of results with DEQAS enabled the use of previously determined cutoffs for hypovitaminosis D.
免疫诊断系统有限公司(IDS)的OCTEIA 25-羟基维生素D[25(OH)D]酶免疫分析自动化应用程序被开发出来,用于分析1958年队列研究中7000多名参与者的25(OH)D。25(OH)D检测方法之间的差异妨碍了研究间的比较以及维生素D缺乏症相关临界值的定义。
本研究的目的是评估检测方法差异对维生素D缺乏症估计患病率的重要性,并评估使用统计协调方法来克服观察到的差异。
在两种商用25(OH)D检测方法(IDS酶免疫分析和 Diasorin放射免疫分析)之间进行一致性分析,并使用来自维生素D外部质量评估计划(DEQAS)的性能数据进行验证。
该研究在英格兰、苏格兰和威尔士进行。
1958年英国出生队列的成员参与了该研究。
对781份样本同时采用IDS和Diasorin放射免疫分析检测25(OH)D。通过参与DEQAS(整个调查过程中的5次分布)获得了额外的质量控制数据。
与Diasorin或DEQAS均值相比,IDS检测的25(OH)D平均浓度分别低15.7和13.7nmol/升(P均<0.0001)。图形检查显示IDS与Diasorin及DEQAS均值之间存在剂量相关偏差,但对数转换消除了该偏差。将测量值之间的对数差异用作调整因子后,25(OH)D平均浓度无差异(IDS与Diasorin或DEQAS比较,P≥0.21),且IDS获得的维生素D缺乏症估计值与Diasorin相似。
检测方法之间的差异对有关维生素D缺乏症的公共卫生信息有影响。与DEQAS进行结果协调后,能够使用先前确定的维生素D缺乏症临界值。