Ozcan N, Ucar F, Arzuhal AE, Bulut E, Ozturk A, Taslipinar Yavuz M, Temel I, Erden G. Evaluation of the analytical performance of Unicel DXI 800 for the Total 25 (OH) Vitamin D measurements.
Clin Biochem 2015;
49:486-491. [PMID:
26655254 DOI:
10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2015.11.022]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2015] [Revised: 11/27/2015] [Accepted: 11/30/2015] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
We assessed the analytical performance of newly developed Access 25(OH) Vitamin D Total assay with Beckman Coulter Unicel DXI 800 and evaluated the agreement between a reference method liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and a chemiluminescence method (LIAISON, DiaSorin).
DESIGN AND METHODS
160 serum samples were included. Deming Regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots were used. The concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) was used to assess the degree of agreement between assays and the reference method.
RESULTS
The CV% values of Unicel DXI 800 for within-run, between-run and between-day were lower than 6%. When compared to LC-MS/MS, the Access 25(OH) Vitamin D Total assay demonstrated an R value of 0.9444 (intercept -0.089, slope 0.951), with an average bias of -2.9%, and the LIAISON 25(OH) Vitamin D Total assay an R value of 0.9405 (intercept -0605, slope 0.924), with an average bias of -13.6%. In comparison with the LIAISON 25(OH) Vitamin D Total assay, the Access 25(OH) Vitamin D Total assay demonstrated an R value of 0.9498 (intercept 0.528, slope 1.029), with an average bias of 1.2%. The agreement with the LC-MS/MS method, based on values of the CCC, was moderate for the Unicel DXI 800 and LIAISON method (0.95, 0.94 respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
The new, automated Access 25(OH) Vitamin D Total assay showed an acceptable correlation with LC-MS/MS and LIAISON. Both methods moderately achieved to classify the patients according to their vitamin D status. However, we need further standardization of vitamin D assays to enhance the accuracy and comparability.
Collapse