OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the newly developed Roche MODULAR Analytics E170 Total Vitamin D and the Siemens ADVIA Centaur Vitamin D Total assays. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Assays were evaluated using the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute protocols. Split patient samples were compared with LC-MS/MS and DiaSorin LIAISON assays (n=79 including 15 specimens with detectable endogenous 25-OH vitamin D(2)). Assay accuracy was also evaluated using the Vitamin D External Quality Assessment Scheme (DEQAS) samples. RESULTS: The ADVIA Centaur and E170 assays demonstrated maximum total CVs of 14.1% and 5.9%, respectively. Both showed excellent linearity (R(2)>0.99). The ADVIA Centaur assay demonstrated interference with bilirubin at 800 μmol/L, hemolysis at 1.25 g/L, and triglycerides at 2.8 mmol/L. Compared to LC-MS/MS, the ADVIA Centaur assay demonstrated a R(2) value of 0.893, average bias of -8.8%; the E170 assay an R(2) value of 0.872, average bias of 14.3% with underestimation of 25-OH vitamin D(2). Compared to the LIAISON assay, the ADVIA Centaur assay demonstrated an R(2) value of 0.781, average bias of -17.3%; the E170 assay an R(2) value of 0.823, average bias of 11.4%. The ADVIA Centaur and E170 assays demonstrated a biases of <20% in 10/10 and 8/10 DEQAS samples, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The ADVIA Centaur and E170 vitamin D assays demonstrated acceptable linearity, imprecision, and accuracy. The E170 assay demonstrated consistent underestimation of 25-OH vitamin D(2) levels. Compared with LC-MS/MS, the ADVIA Centaur assay demonstrated a higher R(2) value and a smaller average bias than the E170 assay.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the newly developed Roche MODULAR Analytics E170 Total Vitamin D and the Siemens ADVIA CentaurVitamin D Total assays. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Assays were evaluated using the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute protocols. Split patient samples were compared with LC-MS/MS and DiaSorin LIAISON assays (n=79 including 15 specimens with detectable endogenous 25-OH vitamin D(2)). Assay accuracy was also evaluated using the Vitamin D External Quality Assessment Scheme (DEQAS) samples. RESULTS: The ADVIA Centaur and E170 assays demonstrated maximum total CVs of 14.1% and 5.9%, respectively. Both showed excellent linearity (R(2)>0.99). The ADVIA Centaur assay demonstrated interference with bilirubin at 800 μmol/L, hemolysis at 1.25 g/L, and triglycerides at 2.8 mmol/L. Compared to LC-MS/MS, the ADVIA Centaur assay demonstrated a R(2) value of 0.893, average bias of -8.8%; the E170 assay an R(2) value of 0.872, average bias of 14.3% with underestimation of 25-OH vitamin D(2). Compared to the LIAISON assay, the ADVIA Centaur assay demonstrated an R(2) value of 0.781, average bias of -17.3%; the E170 assay an R(2) value of 0.823, average bias of 11.4%. The ADVIA Centaur and E170 assays demonstrated a biases of <20% in 10/10 and 8/10 DEQAS samples, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The ADVIA Centaur and E170vitamin D assays demonstrated acceptable linearity, imprecision, and accuracy. The E170 assay demonstrated consistent underestimation of 25-OH vitamin D(2) levels. Compared with LC-MS/MS, the ADVIA Centaur assay demonstrated a higher R(2) value and a smaller average bias than the E170 assay.
Authors: Yu Chen; Mehrdad Yazdanpanah; Xiao Yan Wang; Barry R Hoffman; Eleftherios P Diamandis; Pui-Yuen Wong Journal: Clin Biochem Date: 2009-12-21 Impact factor: 3.281
Authors: Alan N Peiris; Beth Bailey; Todd Manning; Reena Kuriacose; Rebecca Copeland; Linda Garrett Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2010-01-12 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Jean-Claude Souberbielle; Jean-Jacques Body; Joan M Lappe; Mario Plebani; Yehuda Shoenfeld; Thomas J Wang; Heike A Bischoff-Ferrari; Etienne Cavalier; Peter R Ebeling; Patrice Fardellone; Sara Gandini; Damien Gruson; Alain P Guérin; Lene Heickendorff; Bruce W Hollis; Sofia Ish-Shalom; Guillaume Jean; Philipp von Landenberg; Alvaro Largura; Tomas Olsson; Charles Pierrot-Deseilligny; Stefan Pilz; Angela Tincani; Andre Valcour; Armin Zittermann Journal: Autoimmun Rev Date: 2010-07-01 Impact factor: 9.754
Authors: G D Carter; J L Berry; E Gunter; G Jones; J C Jones; H L J Makin; S Sufi; M J Wheeler Journal: J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol Date: 2010-03-17 Impact factor: 4.292
Authors: Giuseppe Lippi; Gian Luca Salvagno; Antonio Fortunato; Mariella Dipalo; Rosalia Aloe; Giorgio Da Rin; Davide Giavarina Journal: J Med Biochem Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Jonathan R Genzen; Jennifer T Gosselin; Thomas C Wilson; Emilian Racila; Matthew D Krasowski Journal: BMC Endocr Disord Date: 2013-11-05 Impact factor: 2.763