Dirk Weismann1, Mirko Peitzsch2, Anna Raida2, Aleksander Prejbisz2, Maria Gosk2, Anna Riester2, Holger S Willenberg2, Reiner Klemm2, Georg Manz2, Timo Deutschbein2, Matthias Kroiss2, Roland Därr2, Martin Bidlingmaier2, Andrzej Januszewicz2, Graeme Eisenhofer1, Martin Fassnacht1. 1. Endocrine and Diabetes UnitDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital, University of Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080 Würzburg, GermanyComprehensive Heart Failure CenterUniversity of Würzburg, Würzburg, GermanyInstitute of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory MedicineUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, GermanyDepartment of HypertensionInstitute of Cardiology, Warsaw, PolandMedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik IVLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, GermanyDivision for Specific EndocrinologyDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetology, Medical Faculty, University Dusseldorf, Dusseldorf, GermanyLDN Labor Diagnostika Nord GmbH und Co. KGNordhorn, GermanyCentral Laboratory of the University Hospital of WuerzburgWürzburg, GermanyComprehensive Cancer Center MainfrankenUniversity of Würzburg, Würzburg, GermanyDepartment of Medicine IIIUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany Endocrine and Diabetes UnitDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital, University of Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080 Würzburg, GermanyComprehensive Heart Failure CenterUniversity of Würzburg, Würzburg, GermanyInstitute of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory MedicineUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, GermanyDepartment of HypertensionInstitute of Cardiology, Warsaw, PolandMedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik IVLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, GermanyDivision for Specific EndocrinologyDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetology, Medical Faculty, University Dusseldorf, Dusseldorf, GermanyLDN Labor Diagnostika Nord GmbH und Co. KGNordhorn, GermanyCentral Laboratory of the University Hospital of WuerzburgWürzburg, GermanyComprehensive Cancer Center MainfrankenUniversity of Würzburg, Würzburg, GermanyDepartment of Medicine IIIUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresd 2. Endocrine and Diabetes UnitDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital, University of Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080 Würzburg, GermanyComprehensive Heart Failure CenterUniversity of Würzburg, Würzburg, GermanyInstitute of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory MedicineUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, GermanyDepartment of HypertensionInstitute of Cardiology, Warsaw, PolandMedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik IVLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, GermanyDivision for Specific EndocrinologyDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetology, Medical Faculty, University Dusseldorf, Dusseldorf, GermanyLDN Labor Diagnostika Nord GmbH und Co. KGNordhorn, GermanyCentral Laboratory of the University Hospital of WuerzburgWürzburg, GermanyComprehensive Cancer Center MainfrankenUniversity of Würzburg, Würzburg, GermanyDepartment of Medicine IIIUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reports conflict concerning measurements of plasma metanephrines (MNs) for diagnosis of pheochromocytomas/paragangliomas (PPGLs) by immunoassays compared with other methods. We aimed to compare the performance of a commercially available enzyme-linked immunoassay (EIA) kit with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometric (LC-MS/MS) measurements of MNs to diagnose PPGLs. METHODS: In a substudy of a prospective, multicenter trial to study the biochemical profiles of monoamine-producing tumors, we included 341 patients (174 males and 167 females) with suspected PPGLs (median age 54 years), of whom 54 had confirmed PPGLs. Plasma MNs were measured by EIA and LC-MS/MS, each in a specialized laboratory. RESULTS: Plasma normetanephrine (NMN) and MN were measured 60 and 39% lower by EIA than by LC-MS/MS. Using upper cut-offs stipulated for the EIA, diagnostic sensitivity was only 74.1% at a specificity of 99.3%. In contrast, use of similar cut-offs for MN and overall lower age-adjusted cut-offs for NMN measured by LC-MS/MS returned a diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of 98.1 and 99.7%. Areas under receiver-operating characteristic curves, nevertheless, indicated comparable diagnostic performance of the EIA (0.993) and LC-MS/MS (0.985). Diagnostic sensitivity for the EIA increased to 96.2% with a minimal loss in specificity (95.1%) following use of cut-offs for the EIA adapted to correct for the negative bias. CONCLUSIONS: The EIA underestimates plasma MNs and diagnostic sensitivity is poor using commonly stipulated cut-offs, resulting in a high risk for missing patients with PPGLs. Correction of this shortcoming can be achieved by appropriately determined cut-offs resulting in comparable diagnostic performance of EIA and LC-MS/MS assays.
BACKGROUND: Reports conflict concerning measurements of plasma metanephrines (MNs) for diagnosis of pheochromocytomas/paragangliomas (PPGLs) by immunoassays compared with other methods. We aimed to compare the performance of a commercially available enzyme-linked immunoassay (EIA) kit with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometric (LC-MS/MS) measurements of MNs to diagnose PPGLs. METHODS: In a substudy of a prospective, multicenter trial to study the biochemical profiles of monoamine-producing tumors, we included 341 patients (174 males and 167 females) with suspected PPGLs (median age 54 years), of whom 54 had confirmed PPGLs. Plasma MNs were measured by EIA and LC-MS/MS, each in a specialized laboratory. RESULTS: Plasma normetanephrine (NMN) and MN were measured 60 and 39% lower by EIA than by LC-MS/MS. Using upper cut-offs stipulated for the EIA, diagnostic sensitivity was only 74.1% at a specificity of 99.3%. In contrast, use of similar cut-offs for MN and overall lower age-adjusted cut-offs for NMN measured by LC-MS/MS returned a diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of 98.1 and 99.7%. Areas under receiver-operating characteristic curves, nevertheless, indicated comparable diagnostic performance of the EIA (0.993) and LC-MS/MS (0.985). Diagnostic sensitivity for the EIA increased to 96.2% with a minimal loss in specificity (95.1%) following use of cut-offs for the EIA adapted to correct for the negative bias. CONCLUSIONS: The EIA underestimates plasma MNs and diagnostic sensitivity is poor using commonly stipulated cut-offs, resulting in a high risk for missing patients with PPGLs. Correction of this shortcoming can be achieved by appropriately determined cut-offs resulting in comparable diagnostic performance of EIA and LC-MS/MS assays.
Authors: Roland Därr; Matthias Kuhn; Christoph Bode; Stefan R Bornstein; Karel Pacak; Jacques W M Lenders; Graeme Eisenhofer Journal: Endocrine Date: 2017-04-12 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: Michaela Kuhlen; Christina Pamporaki; Marina Kunstreich; Stefan A Wudy; Michaela F Hartmann; Mirko Peitzsch; Christian Vokuhl; Guido Seitz; Michael C Kreissl; Thorsten Simon; Barbara Hero; Michael C Frühwald; Peter Vorwerk; Antje Redlich Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2022-06-17 Impact factor: 6.055
Authors: Jessica Boyd; Alexander A Leung; Hossein Sm Sadrzadeh; Christina Pamporaki; Karel Pacak; Timo Deutschbein; Stephanie Fliedner; Gregory A Kline Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: Martijn van Faassen; Rainer Bischoff; Karin Eijkelenkamp; Wilhelmina H A de Jong; Claude P van der Ley; Ido P Kema Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2020-06-12 Impact factor: 6.986