Proteomic analysis of intraluminal thrombus highlights complement activation in human abdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: To identify proteins related to intraluminal thrombus biological activities that could help to find novel pathological mechanisms and therapeutic targets for human abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). APPROACH AND RESULTS: Tissue-conditioned media from patients with AAA were analyzed by a mass spectrometry-based strategy using liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry. Global pathway analysis by Ingenuity software highlighted the presence of several circulating proteins, among them were proteins from the complement system. Complement C3 concentration and activation were assessed in plasma from AAA patients (small AAA, AAA diameter=3-5 cm and large AAA, AAA diameter >5 cm), showing decreased C3 levels and activation in large AAA patients. No association of a combination of single-nucleotide polymorphisms in complement genes between large and small AAA patients was observed. Intense extracellular C3 inmunostaining, along with C9, was observed in AAA thrombus. Analysis of C3 in AAA tissue homogenates and tissue-conditioned media showed increased levels of C3 in AAA thrombus, as well as proteolytic fragments (C3a/C3c/C3dg), suggesting its local deposition and activation. Finally, the functional role of local complement activation in polymorphonuclear (PMN) cell activation was tested, showing that C3 blockade by anti-C3 antibody was able to decrease thrombus-induced neutrophil chemotaxis and reactive oxygen species production. CONCLUSIONS: A decrease of systemic C3 concentration and activity in the later stages of AAA associated with local complement retention, consumption, and proteolysis in the thrombus could induce PMN chemotaxis and activation, playing a detrimental role in AAA progression.

Macroprolactin: From laboratory to clinical practice.

Prolactin measurement is very common in standard clinical practice. It is indicated not only in the study of pituitary adenomas, but also when there are problems with fertility, decreased libido, or menstrual disorders, among other problems. Inadequate interpretation of prolactin levels without contextualizing the laboratory results with the clinical, pharmacological, and gynecological/urological history of patients leads to erroneous diagnoses and, thus, to poorly based studies and treatments. Macroprolactinemia, defined as hyperprolactinemia due to excess macroprolactin (an isoform of a greater molecular weight than prolactin but with less biological activity), is one of the main causes of such erroneous diagnoses, resulting in poor patient management when not recognized. There is no unanimous agreement as to when macroprolactin screening is required in patients with hyperprolactinemia. At some institutions, macroprolactin testing by polyethylene glycol (PEG) precipitation is routinely performed in all patients with hyperprolactinemia, while others use a clinically based approach. There is also no consensus on how to express the results of prolactin/macroprolactin levels after PEG, which in some cases may lead to an erroneous interpretation of the results. The objectives of this study were: 1. To establish the strategy for macroprolactin screening by serum precipitation with PEG in patients with hyperprolactinemia: universal screening versus a strategy guided by the alert generated by the clinician based on the absence or presence of clinical symptoms or by the laboratory when hyperprolactinemia is detected. 2. To create a consensus document that standardizes the reporting of prolactin results after precipitation with PEG to minimize errors in the interpretation of the results, in line with international standards.

Macroprolactin: From laboratory to clinical practice. / Macroprolactina: del laboratorio a la práctica clínica. Recomendaciones del grupo de trabajo de laboratorio de la SEEN y de la comisión de hormonas de la SEQCML sobre la medición e informe del resultado de la macroprolactina.

Prolactin measurement is very common in standard clinical practice. It is indicated not only in the study of pituitary adenomas, but also when there are problems with fertility, decreased libido, or menstrual disorders, among other problems. Inadequate interpretation of prolactin levels without contextualizing the laboratory results with the clinical, pharmacological, and gynecological/urological history of patients leads to erroneous diagnoses and, thus, to poorly based studies and treatments. Macroprolactinemia, defined as hyperprolactinemia due to excess macroprolactin (an isoform of a greater molecular weight than prolactin but with less biological activity), is one of the main causes of such erroneous diagnoses, resulting in poor patient management when not recognized. There is no unanimous agreement as to when macroprolactin screening is required in patients with hyperprolactinemia. At some institutions, macroprolactin testing by polyethylene glycol (PEG) precipitation is routinely performed in all patients with hyperprolactinemia, while others use a clinically based approach. There is also no consensus on how to express the results of prolactin/macroprolactin levels after PEG, which in some cases may lead to an erroneous interpretation of the results. The objectives of this study were: 1. To establish the strategy for macroprolactin screening by serum precipitation with PEG in patients with hyperprolactinemia: universal screening versus a strategy guided by the alert generated by the clinician based on the absence or presence of clinical symptoms or by the laboratory when hyperprolactinemia is detected. 2. To create a consensus document that standardizes the reporting of prolactin results after precipitation with PEG to minimize errors in the interpretation of the results, in line with international standards.

Homogenization of the lipid profile values. / Homogeneización de los valores del perfil lipídico.

Analytical reports from the clinical laboratory are essential to guide clinicians about what lipid profile values should be considered altered and, therefore, require intervention. Unfortunately, there is a great heterogeneity in the lipid values reported as "normal, desirable, recommended or referenced" by clinical laboratories. This can difficult clinical decisions and be a barrier to achieve the therapeutic goals for cardiovascular prevention. A recent international recommendation has added a new heterogeneity factor for the interpretation of lipid profile, such as the possibility of measuring it without previous fasting. All this justifies the need to develop a document that adapts the existing knowledge to the clinical practice of our health system. In this regard, professionals from different scientific societies involved in the measurement and use of lipid profile data have developed this document to establish recommendations that facilitate their homogenization.

Removing Lipemia in Serum/Plasma Samples: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Lipemia, a significant source of analytical errors in clinical laboratory settings, should be removed prior to measuring biochemical parameters. We investigated whether lipemia in serum/plasma samples can be removed using a method that is easier and more practicable than ultracentrifugation, the current reference method. METHODS: Seven hospital laboratories in Spain participated in this study. We first compared the effectiveness of ultracentrifugation (108,200×g) and high-speed centrifugation (10,000×g for 15 minutes) in removing lipemia. Second, we compared high-speed centrifugation with two liquid-liquid extraction methods-LipoClear (StatSpin, Norwood, USA), and 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany). We assessed 14 biochemical parameters: serum/plasma concentrations of sodium ion, potassium ion, chloride ion, glucose, total protein, albumin, creatinine, urea, alkaline phosphatase, gamma-glutamyl transferase, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate-aminotransferase, calcium, and bilirubin. We analyzed whether the differences between lipemia removal methods exceeded the limit for clinically significant interference (LCSI). RESULTS: When ultracentrifugation and high-speed centrifugation were compared, no parameter had a difference that exceeded the LCSI. When high-speed centrifugation was compared with the two liquid-liquid extraction methods, we found differences exceeding the LCSI in protein, calcium, and aspartate aminotransferase in the comparison with 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane, and in protein, albumin, and calcium in the comparison with LipoClear. Differences in other parameters did not exceed the LCSI. CONCLUSIONS: High-speed centrifugation (10,000×g for 15 minutes) can be used instead of ultracentrifugation to remove lipemia in serum/plasma samples. LipoClear and 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane are unsuitable as they interfere with the measurement of certain parameters.

Multicentric evaluation of the homogeneous LDL-cholesterol Plus assay: comparison with beta-quantification and Friedewald formula.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the analytical and clinical performance of a new version of the LDL-C Plus assay and compare it with the beta-quantification (BQ) method in a multicenter study. DESIGN AND METHODS: Direct LDL-C was measured in 169 fresh pooled samples and in 830 clinical samples with known LDL-C by BQ. The reactivity of lipoproteins and the effect of hemoglobin, bilirubin and chylomicrons (CM) were studied. RESULTS: Direct LDL-C total imprecision was <2.2%; inaccuracy <+/-2.5% (unaffected by triglycerides up to 9.5 mmol/L); and total error 9.8%. Direct assay reacted with 95%, 50% and 25% of the cholesterol in the LDL, intermediate (IDL) and VLDL fractions, respectively. A significant association was observed with BQ. Icteric samples showed a negative bias and the effect of CM was variable. A positive bias was observed when VLDL-cholesterol/triglyceride ratio was >0.57. CONCLUSIONS: LDL-C Plus assay represents a valid alternative to BQ for clinical laboratories.