Discordance of insulin-like growth factor-1 results and interpretation on four different platforms

Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry in clinical laboratory protein measurement

Proteins are essential components of human cells and tissues, and they are commonly measured in clinical laboratories using immunoassays. However, these assays have certain limitations, such as non-specificity binding, insufficient selectivity, and interference of antibodies. More sensitive, accurate, and efficient technology is required to overcome these limitations. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is a powerful analytical tool that provides high sensitivity and specificity, making it superior to traditional methods such as biochemical methods and immunoassays. While LC-MS/MS has been increasingly used for detecting small molecular analytes and steroid hormones in clinical practice recently, its application for protein or peptide analysis is still in its early stages. Established methods for quantifying proteins and peptides by LC-MS/MS are mainly focused on scientific research, and only a few proteins and peptides can be or have the potential to be detected and applied in clinical practice. Therefore, this article aims to review the clinical applications, advantages, and challenges of analyzing proteins and peptides using LC-MS/MS in clinical laboratories.

Challenges of insulin-like growth factor-1 testing

Insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), primarily synthesized in the liver, was initially discovered due to its capacity to replicate the metabolic effects of insulin. Subsequently, it emerged as a key regulator of the actions of growth hormone (GH), managing critical processes like cell proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis. Notably, IGF-1 displays a longer half-life compared to GH, making it less susceptible to factors that may affect GH concentrations. Consequently, the measurement of IGF-1 proves to be more specific and sensitive when diagnosing conditions such as acromegaly or GH deficiency. The recognition of the existence of IGFBPs and their potential to interfere with IGF-1 immunoassays urged the implementation of various techniques to moderate this issue and provide accurate IGF-1 results. Additionally, in response to the limitations associated with IGF-1 immunoassays and the occurrence of discordant IGF-1 results, modern mass spectrometric methods were developed to facilitate the quantification of IGF-1 levels. Taking advantage of their ability to minimize the interference caused by IGF-1 variants, mass spectrometric methods offer the capacity to deliver robust, reliable, and accurate IGF-1 results, relying on the precision of mass measurements. This also enables the potential detection of pathogenic mutations through protein sequence analysis. However, despite the analytical challenges, the discordance in IGF-1 reference intervals can be attributed to a multitude of factors, potentially leading to distinct interpretations of results. The establishment of reference intervals for each assay is a demanding task, and it requires nationwide multicenter collaboration among laboratorians, clinicians, and assay manufacturers to achieve this common goal in a cost-effective and resource-efficient manner. In this comprehensive review, we examine the challenges associated with the standardization of IGF-1 measurement methods, the minimization of pre-analytical factors, and the harmonization of reference intervals. Particular emphasis will be placed on the development of IGF-1 measurement techniques using "top-down" or "bottom-up" mass spectrometric methods.

Biological Variation Data in Triathletes for Metabolism and Growth-Related Biomarkers Included in the Athlete Biological Passport

BACKGROUND

When using biological variation (BV) data, BV estimates need to be robust and representative. High-endurance athletes represent a population under special physiological conditions, which could influence BV estimates. Our study aimed to estimate BV in athletes for metabolism and growth-related biomarkers involved in the Athlete Biological Passport (ABP), by 2 different statistical models.

METHODS

Thirty triathletes were sampled monthly for 11 months. The samples were analyzed for human growth hormone (hGH), insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3), insulin, and N-terminal propeptide of type III procollagen (P-III-NP) by immunoassay. Bayesian and ANOVA methods were applied to estimate within-subject (CVI) and between-subject BV.

RESULTS

CVI estimates ranged from 7.8% for IGFBP-3 to 27.0% for insulin, when derived by the Bayesian method. The 2 models gave similar results, except for P-III-NP. Data were heterogeneously distributed for P-III-NP for the overall population and in females for IGF-1 and IGFBP-3. BV components were not estimated for hGH due to lack of steady state. The index of individuality was below 0.6 for all measurands, except for insulin.

CONCLUSIONS

In an athlete population, to apply a common CVI for insulin would be appropriate, but for IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 gender-specific estimates should be applied. P-III-NP data were heterogeneously distributed and using a mean CVI may not be representative for the population. The high degree of individuality for IGF-1, IGFBP-3, and P-III-NP makes them good candidates to be interpreted through reference change values and the ABP.