Department of Clinical Chemistry, Isala, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
European Reference Laboratory for Glycohemoglobin, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2024 Jun 17;62(12):2526-2533. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2024-0591. Print 2024 Nov 26.
Glycated albumin (GA) has potential value in the management of people with diabetes; however, to draw meaningful conclusions between clinical studies it is important that the GA values are comparable. This study investigates the standardization of the Norudia Glycated Albumin and Lucica Glycated Albumin-L methods.
The manufacturer reported imprecision was verified by performing CLSI-EP15-A3 protocol using manufacturer produced controls. The Japanese Clinical Chemistry Reference Material (JCCRM)611-1 was measured 20 times to evaluate the accuracy of both methods. GA was also measured in 1,167 patient samples and results were compared between the methods in mmol/mol and %.
Maximum CV for Lucica was ≤0.6 % and for Norudia ≤1.8 % for control material. Results in mmol/mol and % of the JCCRM611-1 were within the uncertainty of the assigned values for both methods. In patient samples the relative difference in mmol/mol between the two methods ranged from -10.4 % at a GA value of 183 mmol/mol to +8.7 % at a GA value of 538 mmol/mol. However, the relative difference expressed in percentage units ranged from of 0 % at a GA value of 9.9 % to +1.7 % at a GA value of 30 %.
The results in mmol/mol between the two methods for the patient samples were significantly different compared to the results in %. It is not clear why patient samples behave differently compared to JCCRM611-1 material. Valuable lessons can be learnt from comparing the standardization process of GA with that of HbA.
糖化白蛋白(GA)在糖尿病患者的管理中有潜在的价值;然而,为了在临床研究之间得出有意义的结论,重要的是GA 值具有可比性。本研究调查了 Norudia 糖化白蛋白和 Lucica 糖化白蛋白-L 方法的标准化。
通过使用制造商生产的控制品执行 CLSI-EP15-A3 方案来验证制造商报告的不精密度。使用两种方法测量 20 次日本临床化学参考材料(JCCRM)611-1,以评估两种方法的准确性。还在 1167 个患者样本中测量了 GA,并在 mmol/mol 和%之间比较了两种方法的结果。
Lucica 的最大 CV 为 ≤0.6%,Norudia 的最大 CV 为 ≤1.8%,用于控制材料。JCCRM611-1 的结果在两种方法的 mmol/mol 和%中均在分配值的不确定度范围内。在患者样本中,两种方法之间的 mmol/mol 相对差异范围为 183 mmol/mol 时为-10.4%,GA 值为 538 mmol/mol 时为+8.7%。然而,以百分比单位表示的相对差异范围为 9.9%时为 0%,GA 值为 30%时为+1.7%。
与%相比,两种方法在患者样本中的 mmol/mol 结果之间存在显著差异。目前尚不清楚为什么患者样本的行为与 JCCRM611-1 材料不同。可以从比较 GA 和 HbA 的标准化过程中吸取宝贵的经验教训。