Seibel M J, Woitge H W, Farahmand I, Oberwittler H, Ziegler R
Department of Medicine, University of Heidelberg, Germany.
Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 1998;106(2):143-8. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1211967.
With the increasing demand for clinically useful biomarkers of bone turnover, a number of assays for the measurement of bone resorption markers have been developed. In the present study, automated (ACS: 180 DPD, Chiron Diagnostics, USA) and manual (DPD-ELISA, Pyrilinks-D, Metra Biosystems, USA) immunoassays for free DPD, and a manual immunoassay for the aminoterminal telopeptide of type I collagen (NTX, Osteomark, Ostex International, USA) were compared to the automated HPLC method for free DPD. Urine samples from a total of 538 healthy and diseased subjects aged 20 to 80 years were analyzed. The age and sex stratified reference ranges were essentially identical for the HPLC, ACS: 180 and the DPD-ELISA, but differed from the NTX assay. Individual values for free DPD as generated by HPLC and immunoassay techniques were highly correlated with each other, whereas correlations between assays measuring free and peptide-bound crosslink components were less pronounced. Precision of the automated techniques (HPLC and ACS: 180) was superior to that of the manual immunoassays. Disease-specific changes in crosslink excretion were similar for all assays and most pronounced in metastatic osteopathy, primary hyperparathyroidism and untreated Paget's disease of bone. We conclude that the automated assays for free DPD in urine, i.e. the HPLC and the ACS: 180 assay, show better analytical performance than the manual immunoassays studied. All techniques used in the present study appear to provide similar or identical clinical information. Therefore, the decision which assay to use largely depends on the laboratory set-up, the number of samples to be analysed, the turn-around time required, and the application for which the test should be used.
随着对临床上有用的骨转换生物标志物的需求不断增加,已经开发了多种用于测量骨吸收标志物的检测方法。在本研究中,将用于游离脱氧吡啶啉(DPD)的自动化检测方法(美国Chiron Diagnostics公司的ACS: 180 DPD)和手动检测方法(美国Metra Biosystems公司的DPD-ELISA,Pyrilinks-D),以及用于I型胶原氨基端肽(NTX,美国Ostex International公司的Osteomark)的手动免疫检测方法与游离DPD的自动化高效液相色谱(HPLC)方法进行了比较。对总共538名年龄在20至80岁之间的健康和患病受试者的尿液样本进行了分析。HPLC、ACS: 180和DPD-ELISA的年龄和性别分层参考范围基本相同,但与NTX检测不同。HPLC和免疫检测技术所产生的游离DPD个体值彼此高度相关,而测量游离和肽结合交联成分的检测方法之间的相关性则不太明显。自动化技术(HPLC和ACS: 180)的精密度优于手动免疫检测方法。所有检测方法中交联物排泄的疾病特异性变化相似,在转移性骨病、原发性甲状旁腺功能亢进和未经治疗的骨Paget病中最为明显。我们得出结论,尿液中游离DPD的自动化检测方法,即HPLC和ACS: 180检测方法,比所研究的手动免疫检测方法具有更好的分析性能。本研究中使用的所有技术似乎都能提供相似或相同的临床信息。因此,选择使用哪种检测方法在很大程度上取决于实验室设置、待分析样本的数量、所需的周转时间以及检测应使用的用途。