Extensive study of human insulin immunoassays: promises and pitfalls for insulin analogue detection and quantification.

BACKGROUND: Over the last few decades, new synthetic insulin analogues have been developed. Their measurement is of prime importance in the investigation of hypoglycaemia, but their quantification is hampered by variable cross-reactivity with many insulin assays. For clinical analysis, it has now become essential to know the potential cross-reactivity of analogues of interest. METHODS: In this work, we performed an extensive study of insulin analogue cross-reactivity using numerous human insulin immunoassays. We investigated the cross-reactivity of five analogues (lispro, aspart, glulisine, glargine, detemir) and two glargine metabolites (M1 and M2) with 16 commercial human insulin immunoassays as a function of concentration. RESULTS: The cross-reactivity values for insulin analogues or glargine metabolites ranged from 0% to 264%. Four assays were more specific to human insulin, resulting in negligible cross-reactivity with the analogues. However, none of the 16 assays was completely free of cross-reactivity with analogues or metabolites. The results show that analogue cross-reactivity, which varies to a large degree, is far from negligible, and should not be overlooked in clinical investigations. CONCLUSIONS: This study has established the cross-reactivity of five insulin analogues and two glargine metabolites using 16 immunoassays to facilitate the choice of the immunoassay(s) and to provide sensitive and specific analyses in clinical routine or investigation.

Thyroid-stimulating hormone and free thyroxine on the ADVIA Centaur immunoassay system: a multicenter assessment of analytical performance.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed the analytical performance of the TSH and FT4 assays on ADVIA Centaur in a multicenter national evaluation. DESIGN AND METHODS: A precision study and a method comparison were performed. Reference values stated by the manufacturer were checked from 379 normal subjects. RESULTS: For TSH and FT4, the intra-assay CVs were below 2.3 and 5.2%, respectively, and the inter-assay CVs below 4.4% and 7.2%, respectively. Therefore, the precision and reproducibility were acceptable. Bland-Altman bias plots revealed good correlation and agreement with Cobas assays. TSH and FT4 data yielded reference ranges of 0.64-3.24 mIU/L and 10.5-18.9 pmol/L, respectively. CONCLUSION: These assays demonstrate reliable characteristics. The reference ranges obtained can be used for interpretation of thyroid function.

Should functional sensitivity of a new thyroid stimulating hormone immunoassay be monitored routinely? The ADVIA Centaur TSH3-UL assay experience.

OBJECTIVES: We emphasize the importance of routine follow-up of subnormal TSH concentrations with QC materials. DESIGN AND METHODS: The functional sensitivity (FS) of the ADVIA Centaur system TSH assay was assessed. We report the values yielded for QC materials in two clinical laboratories. RESULTS: The FS was <0.02 mIU/L. The low-TSH QC (a serum pool) showed unacceptable between-lot imprecision (mean 0.0252 mIU/L, CV 22%). CONCLUSION: We do encourage healthcare laboratories to constitute low-TSH serum pools to ensure that the results they report meet 3rd-generation criteria.

Use of insulin immunoassays in clinical studies involving rapid-acting insulin analogues: Bi-insulin IRMA preliminary assessment.

BACKGROUND: In clinical studies involving rapid-acting analogues (RAAs), insulin immunoreactivity is frequently measured, including endogenous, regular insulin (RI) and RAA immunoreactivities. Such a procedure implies equivalent cross-reactivities of all insulins present in serum. Commercially available human insulin immunoassays have been widely used, but their limitations (including hemolysis and anti-insulin antibodies) were not fully investigated. The aims of our study were to compare cross-reactivities of RI and RAAs in buffer and in serum and to investigate insulin immunoassay pitfalls. METHODS: Cross-reactivities were assessed using Bi-insulin IRMA (Schering Cis-Bio International) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS)-1% bovine serum albumin (BSA) and in pools of sera spiked with RI and RAAs (lispro and aspart). To investigate the influence of hemolysis, a pool of sera spiked with RAA was mixed with a concentrated hemolysate (final hemoglobin concentration 10 g/L) and incubated for 3 h at room temperature. To determine interference by anti-insulin antibodies, insulin was removed using charcoal from 18 sera with anti-insulin antibodies and from 17 sera without detectable anti-insulin antibodies. These insulin-free samples were then spiked with RI and RAAs and the immunoreactivity was determined. RESULTS: Compared with buffer, cross-reactivity in serum for RI, lispro and aspart was lower (35%, 29% and 26% lower, respectively). Hemolysis degraded almost all RI and RAAs contained in the serum (>or=95%). Anti-insulin antibody interference was significant for RI and RAAs (p

Increased sensitivity of a new assay for anti-thyroglobulin antibody detection in patients with autoimmune thyroid disease.

OBJECTIVES: To verify the cut-off values and to determine the clinical sensitivity of antithyroglobulin (TgAb) determinations using our routine RIA and the new electrochemiluminescent Elecsys assay. DESIGN AND METHODS: We used the DYNOtest anti-Tgn manual RIA from BRAHMS and the new automated Elecsys electrochemiluminescent immunoassay from Roche Diagnostics. We analyzed 452 sera from the following subjects: 193 euthyroid controls, 163 with treated and untreated autoimmune thyroid diseases (AITD) (108 Graves' disease and 55 thyroiditis), 50 with differentiated thyroid carcinoma, 13 with nonautoimmune thyroid disease and 33 with type 1 diabetes mellitus. RESULTS: As expected, using the proposed thresholds (BRAHMS 60 kIU/L, Elecsys 115 kIU/L) approximately 6% of the control subjects were positive for TgAb with both methods. In AITD patients, the sensitivity of TgAb determination was significantly higher with the Elecsys assay (51.5%) than with the BRAHMS assay (39.3%). This difference was not observed in the other patient groups. CONCLUSION: The Elecsys assay can be preferred not only because it is automated and rapid, but also because of its better clinical performance in AITD patients.

Clinical evaluation of nine free thyroxine assays: persistent problems in particular populations.

Over the past decade, numerous papers have addressed the various methodological problems encountered with free thyroxine (FT4) assays. We evaluated the clinical performance of nine FT4 assays in five centres, using a panel of 310 sera: 156 from euthyroid controls; 27 from hyperthyroid patients; 34 from untreated hypothyroidism; 22 from patients with renal failure; 30 from women in the last trimester of pregnancy; 23 from patients on thyroid substitutive therapy; and 18 from patients treated with amiodarone. Only three methods showed a Gaussian distribution of FT4 concentrations. Reference ranges were calculated using the 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles. A significant difference was observed between FT4 values in men and women. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves ranged from 0.996 to 1 for hyperthyroidism and from 0.973 to 1 for hypothyroidism. In sera from patients with renal failure and from pregnant women, method-dependent biases were observed and confirmed with dilution experiments. In conclusion, current FT4 assays show good performance regarding the diagnosis of overt dysthyroidism. Nevertheless, FT4 measurements are still vulnerable to method-dependent artefacts in particular populations such as patients with renal failure and pregnant women.

Comparison of antigenicity of Hoechst 21PH insulin using either implantable intraperitoneal pump or subcutaneous external pump infusion in type 1 diabetic patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the antigenicity of the insulin Hoechst 21PH (Hoe21PH) using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and to compare the antigenicity of this insulin when administered intraperitoneally or subcutaneously. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS; Peritoneal administration of Hoe21PH (Hoechst-Roussel, Somerville, NJ) insulin using implantable devices (continuous peritoneal insulin infusion [CPII]) increases anti-insulin antibody (AIA) levels in type 1 diabetic patients. Intraperitoneal administration, addition of a stabilizer (polyethylene polypropylene glycol), or insulin modifications due to storage in the pump may be involved in this antigenicity. In this nonrandomized study, 24 type 1 diabetic patients were treated with either CSII (n = 11, group 1) or CPII (n = 13, group 2). AIA levels were measured by radioimmunoassay (RIA) or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) before starting patients on Hoe21PH and again after 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: Patients were comparable in the two groups. AIA levels (RIA) remained stable (24.3 +/- 8.5% [month 0] to 24.9 +/- 8.5.5% [month 6]) in group 1 and increased (21.8 +/- 6.7% [month 0] to 41.8 +/- 6.9% [month 6]) in group 2 (P = 0.005, Wilcoxon's rank-sum test). Using ELISA, AIA remained stable in the patients in group 1 (n = 9; 3.8 +/- 0.8 units/ml [month 0] and 4.1 +/- 1.0 units/ml [month 6]) and tended to increase in the patients in group 2 (n = 12; 4.1 +/- 0.7 units/ml [month 0] to 17.5 +/- 4.6 units/ml [month 6]) (P = 0.07). Comparison of the evolution of AIA formation between the two groups, using RIA at months 0, 3, and 6 showed a significant difference (analysis of variance, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: No increase in AIA levels was demonstrated when Hoe21PH insulin was administered subcutaneously as assessed by two different assays. CPII is proven to be more antigenic than CSII, and this is not related to a specific antigenicity of Hoe21PH insulin. The intraperitoneal route of administration or insulin modifications due to insulin storage in implantable devices might explain this antigenicity.

Free prolactin determinations in hyperprolactinemic men with suspicion of macroprolactinemia.

BACKGROUND: The Elecsys prolactin (PRL) assay reacts more strongly with macroprolactin than the Centaur PRL assay. We evaluated Elecsys direct and free PRL measurements vs. Centaur direct PRL measurements, in sera with and without macroprolactin. METHODS: PRL was measured using Elecsys and Centaur direct assays and the Elecsys assay in the supernatant obtained after PEG precipitation (free PRL) in 34 sera from 34 hyperprolactinemic male subjects (Elecsys direct PRL>434 mIU/l) classified, according to the PRL recovery after PEG precipitation, as: negative, i.e. without predominant macroprolactin (recovery %>50, n=12), positive (recovery %<40, n=18) or indeterminate (n=4). RESULTS: The positive bias between Elecsys direct and Centaur PRL results was clearly influenced by the presence of macroprolactin and the mean bias between Elecsys free and Centaur prolactin values was near zero in the negative and positive groups. Among 14 patients from the positive group presenting clinical conditions possibly ascribable to hyperprolactinemia, Elecsys free and Centaur PRL levels were normal in seven and increased in five. In the negative and positive groups considered together, Elecsys free PRL agreed well with Centaur prolactin (28/30). The poor concordance observed for the indeterminate samples underlined the heterogeneity of macroprolactin. CONCLUSION: Elecsys free PRL determination can be used to reduce the marked influence of macroprolactin in this assay.