Five commercially available insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) assays in comparison to the former Nichols Advantage IGF-I in a growth hormone treated population.

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10541/65701
Title:
Five commercially available insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) assays in comparison to the former Nichols Advantage IGF-I in a growth hormone treated population.
Authors:
Krebs, Alexander; Wallaschofski, Henri; Spilcke-Liss, Elisabeth; Kohlmann, Thomas; Brabant, Georg E; Völzke, Henry; Nauck, Matthias
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: The serum insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) level is accepted to diagnose the growth hormone (GH) status. Here, we evaluated the DRG IGF-I 600 ELISA, DSL IGF-I ELISA, IDS OCTEIA IGF-I, Mediagnost IGF-I-ELISA, and the Siemens Immulite 2500 IGF-I in comparison to the former Nichols Advantage IGF-I assay. METHODS: Imprecision was determined by use of a serum pool and commercial control materials. Accuracy was evaluated by means of a method comparison to Nichols in 173 serum samples of GH deficient patients. RESULTS: The Siemens and the IDS IGF-I assays showed the lowest imprecision with coefficients of variation up to 3.6% and 6.9%, respectively. Both correlated best to Nichols (Siemens: y=0.667X+8.8 microg/L, r=0.950; IDS: y=0.527 X+4.6 microg/L, r=0.927) with the lowest dispersion of residuals from a linear equation. The DSL assay had the highest comparability to Nichols (y=1.000 X+35.5 microg/L, r=0.864), but with a considerable scattering. CONCLUSIONS: To yield IGF-I determination comparable to the former Nichols IGF-I, either the Siemens or the IDS assay should be applied, and the results should be converted by a linear method transformation. Where a conversion factor is not desired, the DSL assay should be selected.
Affiliation:
Institute of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Ernst Moritz Arndt University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany. alexander.krebs@uni-greifswald.de
Citation:
Five commercially available insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) assays in comparison to the former Nichols Advantage IGF-I in a growth hormone treated population. 2008, 46 (12):1776-83 Clin. Chem. Lab. Med.
Journal:
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
Issue Date:
2008
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10541/65701
DOI:
10.1515/CCLM.2008.349
PubMed ID:
19055455
Type:
Article
Language:
en
ISSN:
1434-6621
Appears in Collections:
All Christie Publications ; Endocrinology

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorKrebs, Alexander-
dc.contributor.authorWallaschofski, Henri-
dc.contributor.authorSpilcke-Liss, Elisabeth-
dc.contributor.authorKohlmann, Thomas-
dc.contributor.authorBrabant, Georg E-
dc.contributor.authorVölzke, Henry-
dc.contributor.authorNauck, Matthias-
dc.date.accessioned2009-04-21T16:57:37Z-
dc.date.available2009-04-21T16:57:37Z-
dc.date.issued2008-
dc.identifier.citationFive commercially available insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) assays in comparison to the former Nichols Advantage IGF-I in a growth hormone treated population. 2008, 46 (12):1776-83 Clin. Chem. Lab. Med.en
dc.identifier.issn1434-6621-
dc.identifier.pmid19055455-
dc.identifier.doi10.1515/CCLM.2008.349-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10541/65701-
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: The serum insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) level is accepted to diagnose the growth hormone (GH) status. Here, we evaluated the DRG IGF-I 600 ELISA, DSL IGF-I ELISA, IDS OCTEIA IGF-I, Mediagnost IGF-I-ELISA, and the Siemens Immulite 2500 IGF-I in comparison to the former Nichols Advantage IGF-I assay. METHODS: Imprecision was determined by use of a serum pool and commercial control materials. Accuracy was evaluated by means of a method comparison to Nichols in 173 serum samples of GH deficient patients. RESULTS: The Siemens and the IDS IGF-I assays showed the lowest imprecision with coefficients of variation up to 3.6% and 6.9%, respectively. Both correlated best to Nichols (Siemens: y=0.667X+8.8 microg/L, r=0.950; IDS: y=0.527 X+4.6 microg/L, r=0.927) with the lowest dispersion of residuals from a linear equation. The DSL assay had the highest comparability to Nichols (y=1.000 X+35.5 microg/L, r=0.864), but with a considerable scattering. CONCLUSIONS: To yield IGF-I determination comparable to the former Nichols IGF-I, either the Siemens or the IDS assay should be applied, and the results should be converted by a linear method transformation. Where a conversion factor is not desired, the DSL assay should be selected.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectEvaluationen
dc.subjectGrowth Hormone Deficiencyen
dc.subjectSensitivityen
dc.subjectSpecificityen
dc.subject.meshBiological Assay-
dc.subject.meshBlood Chemical Analysis-
dc.subject.meshHumans-
dc.subject.meshInsulin-Like Growth Factor I-
dc.titleFive commercially available insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) assays in comparison to the former Nichols Advantage IGF-I in a growth hormone treated population.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentInstitute of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Ernst Moritz Arndt University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany. alexander.krebs@uni-greifswald.deen
dc.identifier.journalClinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicineen

Related articles on PubMed

All Items in Christie are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.