Variation in serum and plasma PTH levels in second-generation assays in hemodialysis patients: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Previous reports show that parathyroid hormone (PTH) concentrations may vary widely depending on the assay used to assess PTH. In this cross-sectional study, we aim to determine the usefulness of standardizing blood handling for optimal interpretation of PTH in patients with chronic kidney disease. STUDY DESIGN: Diagnostic test study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Predialysis blood was sampled in 34 long-term hemodialysis patients at a single academic medical center. INDEX TEST: PTH was measured by using 6 different automated second-generation assays (Elecsys, Advia Centaur, LIAISON, Immulite, Architect, and Access assays), 3 blood specimen types (serum, EDTA plasma, and citrate plasma), and 2 consecutive days of measurement (after thawing and 18 hours later with samples having been let at room temperature). REFERENCE TEST: None. RESULTS: A mixed statistical analysis model showed that the nature of the assay (P < 0.001) and nature of the blood sample (P < 0.001) significantly influenced variability in PTH concentrations, whereas day of measurement (day 1 or 2) did not (P = 0.5). Most PTH variability was caused by observations (96.8%), then manufacturer's kit (2.5%), and last, specimen type (0.7%). PTH concentrations measured in citrate plasma were lower with every assay method used than those observed in serum or EDTA plasma. The interaction between manufacturer and specimen type was of moderate statistical significance (P = 0.04). To evaluate the potential clinical consequence of PTH measure variability, we classified patients according to Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative cutoff values (PTH < 150 pg/mL; PTH, 150 to 300 pg/mL; and PTH > 300 pg/mL). Overall, statistical classification agreement was moderate to high for comparison between assays and high to very high between different blood samples and between days of measurement. However, we found that up to 11 of 34 patients were classified in different categories with some assays (LIAISON versus Architect) and up to 7 of 34 in different categories with different blood specimen type (citrate plasma versus serum [corrected] in LIAISON assay). LIMITATIONS: This is a cross-sectional study that used single lots of reagents. There currently is no reference method for the measurement of PTH and no recombinant PTH standard for PTH assay. CONCLUSION: PTH variability caused by the nature of the assay and/or blood specimen type is large enough to potentially influence clinical decision making. A specified collection method therefore should be used for PTH measurements. In routine practice, we recommend serum PTH over EDTA or citrate plasma.

Higher parathyroid hormone (PTH) concentrations with the Architect PTH assay than with the Elecsys assay in hemodialysis patients, and a simple way to standardize these two methods.

BACKGROUND: The Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) guidelines recommend maintaining serum parathyroid hormone (PTH) concentration between 150 and 300 pg/mL in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 5. However, a marked inter-method variability in PTH measurement has been reported recently. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether harmonization of the results measured with two commercial kits known to produce significantly different serum PTH concentrations could be reasonably achieved by a simple procedure. METHODS: The study comprised a total of 216 hemodialyzed patients in whom blood was collected immediately before a dialysis session. The patients were from three dialysis centers, which defined three groups (119, 34, and 63 patients for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively). PTH was measured by two automated assays, the Elecsys (Roche Diagnostics) and Architect (Abbott Diagnostics) assays, in three different laboratories and with different lots of reagents. We arbitrarily chose the Roche assay as the reference method, because several studies had previously shown that the concentrations measured with this assay were very close to the Allegro assay used in the studies that defined the K/DOQI thresholds. Data are median (interquartile range). RESULTS: The median PTH concentrations were higher (p<0.001) in the Architect assay [238 (140-434) pg/mL] when compared to the Elecsys assay [182 (109-338) pg/mL]. Bland-Altman plots in the three groups showed a similar proportional bias between both kits. The Architect PTH/Elecsys PTH ratios were similar in the three groups [1.30 (1.25-1.35), 1.30 (1.19-1.39), and 1.31 (1.25-1.35)], and the ratio was 1.30 (1.25-1.35) in the cohort (pooling the three groups). In the whole population, 53 patients (24.5%) were classified differently by the two kits according to the K/DOQI cut-off values. We divided the Architect values by 1.3 to obtain "corrected" values. These corrected Architect values were not different to the measured Elecsys values, and the Bland-Altman plot comparing the Elecsys and the corrected Artchitect values did not show any systematic proportional bias. Only six patients (2.8%) were still classified differently by the Elecsys and the corrected Architect concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: We propose to divide the PTH values measured with the Architect PTH assay by 1.3 so that the corrected values are almost identical to those measured with the Elecsys assay.