Department of Clinical Chemistry, University of Liège, CHU Sart-Tilman, Domaine du Sart-Tilman, B-4000 Liège, Belgium.
Mellanby Centre for Bone Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2019 Sep 25;57(10):1546-1555. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2019-0174.
Background Biochemical bone turnover markers (BTM) are useful tools to assess bone remodeling at the cellular level. N-terminal propeptide of type I procollagen (PINP) has been recommended as a reference marker for bone formation in research studies. Methods We describe the results of a multicenter study for routine clinical laboratory assays for PINP in serum and plasma. Four centers (Athens, Greece [GR], Copenhagen, Denmark [DK], Liege, Belgium [BE] and Sheffield, United Kingdom [UK]) collected serum and plasma (EDTA) samples from 796 patients presenting to osteoporosis clinics. Specimens were analyzed in duplicate with each of the available routine clinical laboratory methods according to the manufacturers' instructions. Passing-Bablok regressions, Bland-Altman plots, V-shape evaluation method and the concordance correlation coefficient for PINP values between serum and plasma specimens and between methods were used to determine the agreement between results. A generalized linear model was employed to identify possible variables that affected the relationship between the methods. Results We showed that both EDTA plasma and serum were suitable for PINP determination. We observed a significant proportional bias between Orion radioimmunoassay and the automated methods for PINP (Roche Cobas and IDS iSYS), which both gave very similar results. The multivariate model did not improve the excellent correlation that was observed between the methods. Conclusions Harmonization of PINP assays is possible by applying a correction factor or correctly assigning the values of the calibrators. This work will benefit from further collaboration between assays manufacturers and clinical laboratory professionals.
背景 生化骨转换标志物(BTM)是评估细胞水平骨重塑的有用工具。I 型前胶原 N 端前肽(PINP)已被推荐作为研究中骨形成的参考标志物。
方法 我们描述了一项针对 PINP 血清和血浆常规临床实验室检测的多中心研究结果。四个中心(希腊雅典[GR]、丹麦哥本哈根[DK]、比利时列日[BE]和英国谢菲尔德[UK])从骨质疏松症诊所就诊的 796 名患者中采集了血清和血浆(EDTA)样本。根据制造商的说明,使用每种可用的常规临床实验室方法对标本进行了双份分析。采用 Passing-Bablok 回归、Bland-Altman 图、V 形评价方法和血清与血浆标本以及方法之间的 PINP 值一致性相关系数来确定结果之间的一致性。使用广义线性模型来确定可能影响方法之间关系的变量。
结果 我们表明 EDTA 血浆和血清均适用于 PINP 测定。我们观察到 Orion 放射免疫分析法与罗氏 Cobas 和 IDS iSYS 等自动化方法之间存在显著的比例偏差,这两种方法的结果非常相似。多元模型并没有改善方法之间观察到的极好相关性。
结论 通过应用校正因子或正确赋值校准品,可以实现 PINP 检测的协调。这项工作将受益于检测制造商和临床实验室专业人员之间的进一步合作。