Vitamin D Toxicity from an Unusual and Unexpected Source: A Report of 2 Cases.

INTRODUCTION: Hypervitaminosis D is a relatively uncommon etiology of hypercalcemia. Toxicity is usually caused by very high doses, mostly secondary to erroneous prescription or administration of vitamin D, and less commonly, contaminated foods or manufacturing errors of vitamin D-containing supplements. CASE PRESENTATION: A 16-year-old male, previously healthy, presented with 2-week history of nonspecific symptoms (fatigue, gastrointestinal complaints). Investigations showed acute kidney injury and hypercalcemia (total calcium 3.81 mmol/L). Further diagnostic workup revealed markedly elevated 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels (1,910 nmol/L). He denied taking any vitamin D supplements; however, he reported consumption of creatine and protein supplements. Mass spectrometry analysis of the creatine supplement estimated a vitamin D content of 425,000 IU per serving (100 times the upper tolerable daily dose). A few months later, another previously healthy adolescent presented with severe hypercalcemia and acute kidney injury secondary to hypervitaminosis D. He was also using a creatine supplement, from the same manufacturer brand and lot. Both patients were treated with intravenous hydration, calcitonin, and pamidronate. They maintained normocalcemia after their initial presentation but required low-calcium diets and laboratory testing for months after this exposure. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: We present 2 cases of hypervitaminosis D caused by a manufacturing error of a natural health product which did not claim to contain vitamin D. The use of dietary supplements is highly prevalent; this should be incorporated while taking medical history, and considered a potential source of toxicity when an alternative source cannot be found, regardless of the product label.

Clinical interpretation of serum hepcidin-25 in inflammation and renal dysfunction.

Introduction: Hepcidin is a hormone that regulates systemic iron homeostasis. Serum hepcidin levels are under the influence of various stimuli, particularly inflammation and renal dysfunction. The measurement of hepcidin in circulation is a potentially useful clinical tool in the diagnosis, monitoring and treatment of iron metabolism disorder, although clinical interpretation of hepcidin level remains difficult. We evaluated he diagnostic potential and limitations of hepcidin-25 by investigating its relationship with iron and hematological indices, inflammation, and renal dysfunction. Methods: This retrospective study included 220 adult patients not requiring dialysis. Variations of biologically active hepcidin-25 were examined using a mass spectrometry-based assay in various inflammatory and renal states. The log[hepcidin]:log[ferritin] ratio was calculated as an hepcidin index. Results: In 220 adult patients not requiring dialysis, variation in hepcidin-25 level was significantly larger once CRP exceeded 10 mg/l (p < 0.001). Inflammation was not a determinant of hepcidin-25 in the setting of renal dysfunction. Hepcidin-25 median (7.37 nM) and variance were significantly higher (p < 0.001), once estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) dropped below 30 ml/min/1.73 m2. The log[hepcidin]:log[ferritin] index normalized hepcidin levels. Patients with iron deficiency have a notably lower index when compared to controls (-0.66 vs 0.3). Conclusion: Severe renal dysfunction (eGFR < 30) affected hepcidin-25 expression and clearance to variable degree between individuals. Although, hepcidin-25 testing is not warranted in patients with infection, inflammatory autoimmune conditions (CRP > 10 mg/l) and/or severe renal dysfunction (eGFR < 30), the hepcidin index may serve as a potential biomarker for iron deficiency in complex cases.

IgG4 plasma cell myeloma without clinical evidence of IgG4-related disease: a report of two cases.

Background: Serum IgG4 is typically measured to investigate for Immunoglobulin G4-related Disease (IgG4-RD), a fibroinflammatory condition associated with polyclonal increase in serum IgG4. However, increased IgG4 can also be monoclonal, and little is known about IgG4 myeloma. Methods: We describe two cases of IgG4 myeloma without clinical, radiologic, or laboratory features of IgG4-related disease. Results: An 84 year old man presented with anemia and compression fractures and a 77 year old man presented with anemia, hypercalcemia and renal failure. Both had markedly elevated monoclonal serum IgG4, 34 g/L and 48 g/L in the beta region, and increased IgG positive bone marrow plasma cells, 50% and 80%, respectively. Neither had clinical or radiological manifestations of IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD) such as salivary or lacrimal gland swelling, autoimmune pancreatitis , or retroperitoneal fibrosis. Both cases responded well to standard myeloma therapy. The IgG4 paraprotein caused spuriously elevated beta-2 microglobulin of 45.2 mg/L in case two due to interference with the assay. Conclusion: These cases illustrate the importance of performing serum protein electrophoresis in tandem with IgG subclasses to distinguish between polyclonal and monoclonal increases in serum IgG4. The lack of typical IgG4-RD features in these two patients suggests that monoclonal elevation in serum IgG4 alone is insufficient to cause the organ damage characteristic of IgG4-RD. Larger studies of IgG myeloma subtypes are warranted to explore whether IgG1, IgG2, IgG3 and IgG4 myeloma differ in natural history and whether the interference with beta-2 microglobulin is specific to IgG4 monoclonal proteins.

Thyrotoxicosis due to 1000-fold error in compounded liothyronine: A case elucidated by mass spectrometry.

BACKGROUND: Thyrotoxicosis attributable exclusively to triiodothyronine (T3) is, by necessity, caused by accidental or intentional ingestion of pharmaceutical preparations. The clinical presentation of T3 overdose appears to differ from classic thyroid storm. CASE: A 30-year-old female patient presented serially to the emergency department with headache, nausea and vomiting. Neurological work-up was negative and she was treated for presumed viral gastroenteritis. Eventually she developed confusion and was admitted. Laboratory investigations showed a suppressed TSH and a free T3 above the linear range (>30 pmol/L), estimated by dilution in normal serum to be 330 pmol/L. She was diagnosed with thyrotoxicosis secondary to recently prescribed compounded liothyronine and was treated with seven rounds of plasmapheresis. Using a rapidly developed mass spectrometric method for T3, it was determined that compounding pharmacy had dispensed liothyronine at a concentration ≃ 1000 -times the prescribed dosage. CONCLUSION: The clinical and mass spectrometry laboratories played an essential role in the diagnosis of thyroid storm in this case of T3 overdose as the expected clinical features of hyperpyrexia, tachycardia and hypertension were initially absent.

Resolution of Spurious Immunonephelometric IgG Subclass Measurement Discrepancies by LC-MS/MS.

BACKGROUND: The Binding Site immunonephelometric (IN) IgG subclass reagents (IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, IgG, BSIN) are used for assessment of both immunodeficiency and IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD). In our laboratory, suspected analytic errors were noted in patients with increases in IgG4: The sum of the individual IgG subclasses was substantially greater than the measured total IgG concentrations (unlike samples with normal IgG4), and the IgG4 concentration was always less than the IgG2 concentration. METHODS: We developed a tryptic digest LC-MS/MS method to quantify IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, and IgG4 in serum. Samples with IgG4 concentrations ranging from <0.03 g/L to 32 g/L were reanalyzed by LC-MS/MS, and a subset was also reanalyzed by Siemens IN (SIN) subclass measurements. RESULTS: Multivariate linear regression identified 3 subclass tests with multiple predictors of the measured subclass concentration. For these 3 subclasses, the predominant predictors were (in terms of LC-MS/MS IgG subclass measurement coefficients) BSIN IgG1 = 0.89·IgG1 + 0.4·IgG4; BSIN IgG2 = 0.94·IgG4 + 0.89·IgG2; and SIN IgG2 = 0.72·IgG2 + 0.24·IgG4. CONCLUSIONS: There is apparent IgG4 cross-reactivity with select IN subclass measurements affecting tests from both vendors tested. These findings can be explained either by direct cross-reactivity of the IN reagents with the IgG4 subclass or unique physicochemical properties of IgG4 that permit nonspecific binding of IgG4 heavy chain to other IgG immunoglobulin heavy chains. Irrespective of the mechanism, the observed intermethod discrepancies support the use of LC-MS/MS as the preferred method for measurement of IgG subclasses when testing patients with suspected IgG4-RD.