Evaluation of the new restandardized Abbott Architect 25-OH Vitamin D assay in vitamin D-insufficient and vitamin D-supplemented individuals.

BACKGROUND

Recently, Abbott Diagnostics has restandardized the Architect 25(OH)D assay against the NIST SRM 2972. We have evaluated the analytical and clinical performance of the restandardized Architect 25(OH)D assay and compared its performance with a NIST-traceable liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method and the Roche total 25(OH)D assay in vitamin D-insufficient individuals before and after vitamin D supplementation.

METHODS

Frozen serum samples were obtained from 88 healthy subjects with self-perceived fatigue and vitamin D-insufficiency <50 nmol L who were randomized to receive a single 100 000 IU dose of vitamin D (n = 48) or placebo (n = 40). Total 25(OH)D concentrations were measured before and 4 weeks after supplementation by the restandardized Architect 25(OH)D assay, LC-MS/MS, and Roche assay.

RESULTS

The Architect 25(OH)D assay showed an intra- and inter-assay imprecision of <5%. Comparison of the Architect assay with the LC-MS/MS method showed a good correlation in both vitamin D-insufficient and vitamin D-supplemented subjects, however, with a negative mean bias of 17.4% and 8.9%, respectively. As compared to the Roche assay, the Abbott assay underestimated 25(OH)D results in insufficient subjects (<50 nmol L ) with a mean negative bias of 17.1%, this negative bias turned into a positive bias in supplemented subjects. Overall there was a moderate agreement in classification of vitamin D-insufficient and -supplemented individuals into different vitamin D states between the Architect 25(OH)D method and LC-MS/MS.

CONCLUSION

The routine use of the restandardized Architect 25(OH)D results in a slight underestimation of circulating total 25(OH)D levels at lower concentrations and thus potential misclassification of vitamin D status.