Randi E Gislefoss1, Tom K Grimsrud2, Lars Mørkrid3. 1. Cancer Registry of Norway, Institute of Population-based Cancer Research, Postbox 5313, 0304 Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: randi.gislefoss@kreftregisteret.no. 2. Cancer Registry of Norway, Institute of Population-based Cancer Research, Postbox 5313, 0304 Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: tom.k.grimsrud@kreftregisteret.no. 3. Institute of Clinical Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Post box 4950, 0424 Oslo, Norway; Department of Medical Biochemistry, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Post box 4950, 0424 Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: lamo2@ous-hf.no.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The potential value of a biobank depends on the quality of the samples, i.e. how well they reflect the biological or biochemical state of the donors at the time of sampling. Documentation of sample quality has become a particularly important issue for researchers and users of biobank studies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term stability of selected components: cholesterol, high density cholesterol (HDLC), low density cholesterol (LDLC), apolipoprotein A1 (apo-A1), apolipoprotein B (apo B), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), prolactin (PRL), thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) and free thyroxin (FT4). DESIGN AND METHODS: Samples, stored at -25°C, from 520 men aged 40-49 years at blood sampling distributed in equally sized groups (n=130) according to length of storage, 0, 4, 17 and 29 years, respectively, were used in a cross sectional design. The freshly collected serum samples were used as a reference group to calculate storage related changes. RESULTS: The differences between fresh samples and samples stored for 29 years were substantial for apo-A1 (+12%), apo-B (+22.3%), HDLC (-69.2%), LDLC (+31.3%), and PRL (-33.5%), while total cholesterol, FSH, LH, TSH and FT4 did not show any significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed large differences in serum level of the selected components. The lipids and apolipoproteins were all changed except for total cholesterol. Most hormones investigated (FSH, LH, TSH and FT4) proved to be stable after 29 years of storage while PRL showed sign of degradation. The observed differences are probably due to long-term storage effects and/or external factors (i.e. diet and smoking).
BACKGROUND: The potential value of a biobank depends on the quality of the samples, i.e. how well they reflect the biological or biochemical state of the donors at the time of sampling. Documentation of sample quality has become a particularly important issue for researchers and users of biobank studies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term stability of selected components: cholesterol, high density cholesterol (HDLC), low density cholesterol (LDLC), apolipoprotein A1 (apo-A1), apolipoprotein B (apo B), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), prolactin (PRL), thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) and free thyroxin (FT4). DESIGN AND METHODS: Samples, stored at -25°C, from 520 men aged 40-49 years at blood sampling distributed in equally sized groups (n=130) according to length of storage, 0, 4, 17 and 29 years, respectively, were used in a cross sectional design. The freshly collected serum samples were used as a reference group to calculate storage related changes. RESULTS: The differences between fresh samples and samples stored for 29 years were substantial for apo-A1 (+12%), apo-B (+22.3%), HDLC (-69.2%), LDLC (+31.3%), and PRL (-33.5%), while total cholesterol, FSH, LH, TSH and FT4 did not show any significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed large differences in serum level of the selected components. The lipids and apolipoproteins were all changed except for total cholesterol. Most hormones investigated (FSH, LH, TSH and FT4) proved to be stable after 29 years of storage while PRL showed sign of degradation. The observed differences are probably due to long-term storage effects and/or external factors (i.e. diet and smoking).
Authors: Gro Dehli Villanger; Emily Learner; Matthew P Longnecker; Helga Ask; Heidi Aase; R Thomas Zoeller; Gun P Knudsen; Ted Reichborn-Kjennerud; Pål Zeiner; Stephanie M Engel Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Sarah R Irvin; Elisabete Weiderpass; Frank Z Stanczyk; Louise A Brinton; Britton Trabert; Hilde Langseth; Nicolas Wentzensen Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-01-13 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Kathleen M Egan; Youngchul Kim; Noemi Bender; James M Hodge; Anna E Coghill; Stephanie A Smith-Warner; Dana E Rollison; Lauren R Teras; Tom K Grimsrud; Tim Waterboer Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-05-05 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Dazhe Chen; Tom K Grimsrud; Hilde Langseth; Dana B Barr; Bryan A Bassig; Aaron Blair; Kenneth P Cantor; Marilie D Gammon; Qing Lan; Nathaniel Rothman; Lawrence S Engel Journal: Environ Res Date: 2020-04-29 Impact factor: 8.431