Rotolo Laura, Galante Greta, Coscia Kimberly, Bissi Valentina, Tucci Lorenzo, Mezzullo Marco, Gambineri Alessandra, Vicennati Valentina, Zavatta Guido, Pagotto Uberto, Di Dalmazi Guido, Fanelli Flaminia
Division of Endocrinology and Diabetes Prevention and Care, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna 40138, Italy.
Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, Bologna 40138, Italy.
Eur J Endocrinol. 2025 Jun 30;193(1):188-196. doi: 10.1093/ejendo/lvaf141.
The influence of immunoassay performance in hypercortisolism and dexamethasone suppression test (DST) settings was scarcely investigated. We evaluated the effectiveness of 2 immunoassays in detecting hypercortisolism compared to recommended liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and compared immunoassay analytical performance in basal and post-DST conditions.
We measured cortisol in post-DST sera of patients with suspected hypercortisolism or adrenal incidentalomas by Elecsys gen I (n = 260), and by Access (n = 217). All samples were also measured by a validated LC-MS/MS method. We estimated hypercortisolism rate according to the established 50 nmol/L cutoff, and generated immunoassay-specific cutoffs providing >95% sensitivity and >80% specificity. Finally, we compared cortisol measurements in basal and post-DST samples.
Using the 50 nmol/L cutoff, both immunoassays detected lower rates of hypercortisolism compared with LC-MS/MS, particularly in patients with adrenal adenomas (P < .050). Elecsys gen I and Access determined 6.9% and 6.4% possible false negatives, respectively. Elecsys gen I also caused 3.8% possible false positives. Optimal cutoff was 41 nmol/L for Elecsys gen I (sensitivity: 97.7%; specificity: 80.8%), and 33 nmol/L for Access (sensitivity: 97.5%; specificity: 78.3%). In basal and post-DST samples, Elecsys gen I overestimated by 32.5% and 6.1%, whereas Access underestimated by -4.7% and -5.9% compared to LC-MS/MS cortisol measurements, respectively. Sex differences in method deviations were noted.
Both immunoassays demonstrated remarkable underdetection of hypercortisolism, suggesting the application of a method-specific cutoff. Immunoassay performance may not be uniform in basal and post-DST conditions and should be purposely examined. Accurate LC-MS/MS methods should be preferred in hypercortisolism settings.
免疫测定在皮质醇增多症和地塞米松抑制试验(DST)中的性能影响鲜有研究。我们评估了两种免疫测定法与推荐的液相色谱 - 串联质谱法(LC - MS/MS)相比检测皮质醇增多症的有效性,并比较了基础状态和DST后条件下免疫测定的分析性能。
我们通过Elecsys第一代(n = 260)和Access(n = 217)测定疑似皮质醇增多症或肾上腺偶发瘤患者DST后血清中的皮质醇。所有样本也通过经过验证的LC - MS/MS方法进行测量。我们根据既定的50 nmol/L临界值估计皮质醇增多症发生率,并生成具有> 95%灵敏度和> 80%特异性的免疫测定特异性临界值。最后,我们比较了基础状态和DST后样本中的皮质醇测量值。
使用50 nmol/L临界值时,与LC - MS/MS相比,两种免疫测定法检测到的皮质醇增多症发生率均较低,尤其是在肾上腺腺瘤患者中(P <.050)。Elecsys第一代和Access分别确定了6.9%和6.4%的可能假阴性。Elecsys第一代还导致了3.8%的可能假阳性。Elecsys第一代的最佳临界值为41 nmol/L(灵敏度:97.7%;特异性:80.8%),Access的最佳临界值为33 nmol/L(灵敏度:97.5%;特异性:78.3%)。与LC - MS/MS皮质醇测量值相比,在基础状态和DST后样本中,Elecsys第一代分别高估了32.5%和6.1%,而Access分别低估了 - 4.7%和 - 5.9%。注意到方法偏差存在性别差异。
两种免疫测定法均显示出对皮质醇增多症的显著漏检,提示应应用方法特异性临界值。免疫测定性能在基础状态和DST后条件下可能不一致,应进行专门检查。在皮质醇增多症情况下,应优先选择准确的LC - MS/MS方法。