George J Schwartz1, Hongyue Wang2, Brian Erway3, Gunnar Nordin4, Jesse Seegmiller5, John C Lieske6, Sten-Erik Back7, W Greg Miller8, John H Eckfeldt5. 1. Division of Pediatric Nephrology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY. 2. University of Rochester, Rochester, NY. 3. ACM Global Laboratories. 4. EQUALIS. 5. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. 6. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 7. Clinical Chemistry. 8. Department of Pathology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Iohexol is utilized for measurement of kidney glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Until recently, there have not been available proficiency standards to assist in calibrating a laboratory's results. In view of a shift in calibration at the University of Rochester Medical Center (URMC) laboratory, serving as Central Biochemistry Laboratory for the CKiD study, we performed a multi-centered laboratory comparison. METHODS: Two batches of 30 fortified sera and patient samples from serum or heparinized plasma were sent for duplicate analysis to URMC, University of Minnesota (UMN), Mayo Clinic, and University of Lund. Five proficiency testing materials from Equalis AB were also provided. Iohexol calibration was performed using dilutions of Omnipaque™ 300 and concentrations measured by HPLC or LC-MS/MS (Mayo). RESULTS: UMN and Lund agreed well. URMC calibration was 11-13% lower, and Mayo was 4-8% lower for fortified samples. URMC corrected calibration was 3-8% higher for these samples. When measured values were adjusted for the results of the Equalis samples, all laboratories agreed within 1-2% on all iohexol concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: For 12 URMC calibrator lots from 11/ 2006 to 3/ 2016, the factor quantifying the underestimation of measured to true iohexol concentration was 0.89. If each concentration were divided by 0.89, the calculated GFRs would be reduced by 10-11%. GFR results for CKiD were adjusted for this shift in calibration. Regular examination of iohexol proficiency testing materials, free exchange of samples among laboratories, and standardized dilution of the stock iohexol for calibration would help to bring more universal agreement to this assay.
BACKGROUND: Iohexol is utilized for measurement of kidney glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Until recently, there have not been available proficiency standards to assist in calibrating a laboratory's results. In view of a shift in calibration at the University of Rochester Medical Center (URMC) laboratory, serving as Central Biochemistry Laboratory for the CKiD study, we performed a multi-centered laboratory comparison. METHODS: Two batches of 30 fortified sera and patient samples from serum or heparinized plasma were sent for duplicate analysis to URMC, University of Minnesota (UMN), Mayo Clinic, and University of Lund. Five proficiency testing materials from Equalis AB were also provided. Iohexol calibration was performed using dilutions of Omnipaque™ 300 and concentrations measured by HPLC or LC-MS/MS (Mayo). RESULTS: UMN and Lund agreed well. URMC calibration was 11-13% lower, and Mayo was 4-8% lower for fortified samples. URMC corrected calibration was 3-8% higher for these samples. When measured values were adjusted for the results of the Equalis samples, all laboratories agreed within 1-2% on all iohexol concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: For 12 URMC calibrator lots from 11/ 2006 to 3/ 2016, the factor quantifying the underestimation of measured to true iohexol concentration was 0.89. If each concentration were divided by 0.89, the calculated GFRs would be reduced by 10-11%. GFR results for CKiD were adjusted for this shift in calibration. Regular examination of iohexol proficiency testing materials, free exchange of samples among laboratories, and standardized dilution of the stock iohexol for calibration would help to bring more universal agreement to this assay.
Authors: Inga Soveri; Ulla B Berg; Jonas Björk; Carl-Gustaf Elinder; Anders Grubb; Ingegerd Mejare; Gunnar Sterner; Sten-Erik Bäck Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2014-05-17 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Derek K S Ng; George J Schwartz; Lisa P Jacobson; Frank J Palella; Joseph B Margolick; Bradley A Warady; Susan L Furth; Alvaro Muñoz Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2011-06-08 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: H Chehade; F Cachat; A-S Jannot; B-J Meyrat; D Mosig; D Bardy; P Parvex; E Girardin Journal: Am J Nephrol Date: 2013-09-30 Impact factor: 3.754
Authors: George J Schwartz; Alvaro Muñoz; Michael F Schneider; Robert H Mak; Frederick Kaskel; Bradley A Warady; Susan L Furth Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2009-01-21 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: George J Schwartz; Michael F Schneider; Paula S Maier; Marva Moxey-Mims; Vikas R Dharnidharka; Bradley A Warady; Susan L Furth; Alvaro Muñoz Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Derek K Ng; Susan L Furth; Bradley A Warady; Deidra C Crews; Jesse C Seegmiller; George J Schwartz Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2021-12-30 Impact factor: 11.072
Authors: Nan Chen; Hao Shi; Luxia Zhang; Li Zuo; Jingyuan Xie; Danshu Xie; Amy B Karger; Shiyuan Miao; Hong Ren; Wen Zhang; Weiming Wang; Yujing Pan; Wei Minji; Zhun Sui; Aghogho Okparavero; Andrew Simon; Juhi Chaudhari; John H Eckfeldt; Lesley A Inker; Andrew S Levey Journal: Kidney Med Date: 2020-01-31