超越临床实践中的方法变化:胰岛素样生长因子1测定的评价。

IF 1.1 Q4 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Paula Sienes Bailo, Marta Fabre Estremera, José Cuenca Alcocel, María Ángeles César Márquez
{"title":"超越临床实践中的方法变化:胰岛素样生长因子1测定的评价。","authors":"Paula Sienes Bailo,&nbsp;Marta Fabre Estremera,&nbsp;José Cuenca Alcocel,&nbsp;María Ángeles César Márquez","doi":"10.1515/almed-2021-0069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) is the preferred biomarker for diagnosing and monitoring growth-related disorders but its serum quantification presents several difficulties since different IGF-I assays still leads to different IGF-I concentrations, especially when results are either above or below the normal range.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a prospective study between November and December 2020 at a tertiary University Hospital with 212 serum samples to determine the analytical performance of the IGF-I assay on the Cobas e411 (Roche Diagnostics) and compare it with that of the Immulite 2000XPi (Siemens).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this work, we report for the first time the existence of discrepancies between IGF-I levels measured by Immulite 2000XPi and Cobas e411. Deming regression model provided a slope of 1.570 (95% CI: 1.395-1.745) and an intercept of -58.591 (95% CI: -89.151 to -28.030), with R<sup>2</sup>=0.967 and average bias of +53.061 with overestimation of IGF-I. It was found that Cobas e411 provides abnormally high IGF-I concentrations, but further studies are required to elucidate the cause of the discrepancies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our data can alert clinicians and laboratory professionals of this situation and avoid misinterpretation of increased IGF-I levels as a therapeutic failure rather than as a problem associated with this method change.</p>","PeriodicalId":72097,"journal":{"name":"Advances in laboratory medicine","volume":"3 4","pages":"397-406"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10197437/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond the method change in clinical practice: evaluation of insulin-like growth factor I assay.\",\"authors\":\"Paula Sienes Bailo,&nbsp;Marta Fabre Estremera,&nbsp;José Cuenca Alcocel,&nbsp;María Ángeles César Márquez\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/almed-2021-0069\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) is the preferred biomarker for diagnosing and monitoring growth-related disorders but its serum quantification presents several difficulties since different IGF-I assays still leads to different IGF-I concentrations, especially when results are either above or below the normal range.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a prospective study between November and December 2020 at a tertiary University Hospital with 212 serum samples to determine the analytical performance of the IGF-I assay on the Cobas e411 (Roche Diagnostics) and compare it with that of the Immulite 2000XPi (Siemens).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this work, we report for the first time the existence of discrepancies between IGF-I levels measured by Immulite 2000XPi and Cobas e411. Deming regression model provided a slope of 1.570 (95% CI: 1.395-1.745) and an intercept of -58.591 (95% CI: -89.151 to -28.030), with R<sup>2</sup>=0.967 and average bias of +53.061 with overestimation of IGF-I. It was found that Cobas e411 provides abnormally high IGF-I concentrations, but further studies are required to elucidate the cause of the discrepancies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our data can alert clinicians and laboratory professionals of this situation and avoid misinterpretation of increased IGF-I levels as a therapeutic failure rather than as a problem associated with this method change.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in laboratory medicine\",\"volume\":\"3 4\",\"pages\":\"397-406\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10197437/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in laboratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/almed-2021-0069\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/almed-2021-0069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:胰岛素样生长因子I (IGF-I)是诊断和监测生长相关疾病的首选生物标志物,但其血清定量存在一些困难,因为不同的IGF-I测定仍然导致不同的IGF-I浓度,特别是当结果高于或低于正常范围时。方法:我们于2020年11月至12月在某第三大学医院进行了一项前瞻性研究,收集了212份血清样本,以确定IGF-I检测Cobas e411(罗氏诊断)的分析性能,并将其与Immulite 2000XPi(西门子)的分析性能进行比较。结果:在这项工作中,我们首次报道了Immulite 2000XPi和Cobas e411测量的IGF-I水平之间存在差异。Deming回归模型的斜率为1.570 (95% CI: 1.395 ~ 1.745),截距为-58.591 (95% CI: -89.151 ~ -28.030),高估IGF-I的R2=0.967,平均偏差为+53.061。研究发现Cobas e411提供异常高的IGF-I浓度,但需要进一步的研究来阐明差异的原因。结论:我们的数据可以提醒临床医生和实验室专业人员注意这种情况,并避免将IGF-I水平升高误解为治疗失败,而不是与这种方法改变相关的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Beyond the method change in clinical practice: evaluation of insulin-like growth factor I assay.

Beyond the method change in clinical practice: evaluation of insulin-like growth factor I assay.

Beyond the method change in clinical practice: evaluation of insulin-like growth factor I assay.

Objectives: Insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) is the preferred biomarker for diagnosing and monitoring growth-related disorders but its serum quantification presents several difficulties since different IGF-I assays still leads to different IGF-I concentrations, especially when results are either above or below the normal range.

Methods: We conducted a prospective study between November and December 2020 at a tertiary University Hospital with 212 serum samples to determine the analytical performance of the IGF-I assay on the Cobas e411 (Roche Diagnostics) and compare it with that of the Immulite 2000XPi (Siemens).

Results: In this work, we report for the first time the existence of discrepancies between IGF-I levels measured by Immulite 2000XPi and Cobas e411. Deming regression model provided a slope of 1.570 (95% CI: 1.395-1.745) and an intercept of -58.591 (95% CI: -89.151 to -28.030), with R2=0.967 and average bias of +53.061 with overestimation of IGF-I. It was found that Cobas e411 provides abnormally high IGF-I concentrations, but further studies are required to elucidate the cause of the discrepancies.

Conclusions: Our data can alert clinicians and laboratory professionals of this situation and avoid misinterpretation of increased IGF-I levels as a therapeutic failure rather than as a problem associated with this method change.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信