Biological variation in thyroid function tests in older adults and clinical implications.

OBJECTIVE: Interpreting thyroid function tests can be challenging due to inherent variation, and the need for tests rises with age. While age-related changes in thyrotropin (TSH) levels are known, the biological variation in older adults remains unclear. DESIGN: We recruited nineteen 65-99-year-old (older adults) without thyroid disease for monthly blood sampling for 1 year. PATIENTS AND MEASUREMENTS: Serum was stored at -20C°, and TSH, total thyroxine (TT4) and total triiodothyronine (TT3) were analysed in random order in a single batch for each participant. Results were compared to test results from 15 euthyroid men aged 24-53 years (younger adults) collected previously using a similar methodology. RESULTS: Interindividual coefficients of variation in older/younger adults were 46.7%/44.0% for TSH, 12.7%/19.5% for TT4 and 14.6%/22.4% for TT3. Intraindividual coefficients of variation (CVI ) were 19.0%/25.4% for TSH, 5.5%/10.8% for TT4 and 6.9%/13.2% for TT3. The index of individuality was below 0.6 for all hormones in all age groups. The number of samples required to determine the homoeostatic set-point at 10% precision in older adults was 14-21 for TSH and 2 for TT4 and TT3. TT4 in older adults was the only parameter in any group with comparable CVI between individuals (p = .22). CONCLUSIONS: CVI for TT4 and TT3 was halved in older compared to younger adults with two tests of TT4 needed to describe the individual set-point. Similar CVI between older adults caused TT4 to provide a reliable estimate of thyroid function, and the added value of measuring thyroxine could improve clinical practice.

Interpretation of TSH and T4 for diagnosing minor alterations in thyroid function: a comparative analysis of two separate longitudinal cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Minor alterations in thyroid function are frequent, and interpretation of thyroid function tests in the individual patient can be challenging. Furthermore, the choice of thyroid function test is debatable. To inform the debate, we performed a comparative evaluation of the variation in thyrotropin (TSH) and thyroxine (T4) in two different cohorts to illustrate the precision of TSH and T4 in the diagnosis and monitoring of thyroid dysfunction. METHODS: A comparative analysis of two separate longitudinal studies previously surveyed with monthly blood sampling for one year among 35 subjects. Participants were included based on T4 within the reference range and TSH either within (euthyroid; n = 15) or above (subclinical hypothyroidism; n = 20) the laboratory reference range on two independent blood samplings before inclusion. Exclusion criteria were known thyroid disease or use of thyroid interfering medication. TSH and T4 in individual samples were measured in a single batch to prevent between-batch variation. The distributions TSH and T4 were compared among euthyroid and subclinical hypothyroid individuals, and bootstrap estimates were used to calculate area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: Collection of twelve, monthly blood samples in the 35 participants provided 420 samples, and data completeness was 100%. The mean TSH was 1.27/7.19 mIU/L and the mean total T4 was 106/85 nmol/L in euthyroid/subclinical hypothyroid participants. The subclinical hypothyroidism state deviated from the euthyroid by 20% for total T4 and by 466% for TSH. The overlap between the euthyroid and subclinical hypothyroid groups was 92.6% (389/420) for total T4 and 9.0% (38/420) of test results for TSH. The estimated AUC was 0.999 (95%-CI: 0.995; 1.00) for TSH and 0.853 (0.736; 0.935) for total T4. There was no confidence interval overlap between participant groups for TSH while there was a considerable overlap for total T4 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The distributions of thyroid function tests illustrated how TSH outperforms T4 for detecting delicate differences in thyroid function in an individual. Thus, TSH was markedly better than T4 to discriminate between the subtle differences in thyroid function corroborating that TSH is the more sensitive and accurate index of thyroid function status in the individual patient.

Reliability of thyroglobulin in serum compared with urinary iodine when assessing individual and population iodine nutrition status.

The occurrence of thyroid disorders relies on I nutrition and monitoring of all populations is recommended. Measuring I in urine is standard but thyroglobulin in serum is an alternative. This led us to assess the reliability of studies using serum thyroglobulin compared with urinary I to assess the I nutrition level and calculate the number of participants needed in a study with repeated data sampling in the same individuals for 1 year. Diet, supplement use and life style factors were assessed by questionnaires. We measured thyroglobulin and thyroglobulin antibodies in serum and I in urine. Participants were thirty-three Caucasians and sixty-four Inuit living in Greenland aged 30-49 years. Serum thyroglobulin decreased with rising I excretion (Kendall's τ -0·29, P=0·005) and did not differ with ethnicity. Variation in individuals was lower for serum-thyroglobulin than for urinary I (mean individual CV: 15·1 v. 46·1 %; P<0·01). It required 245 urine samples to be 95 % certain of having a urinary I excretion within 10 % of the true mean of the population. For serum-thyroglobulin the same precision required 206 samples. In an individual ten times more samples were needed to depict I deficiency when using urinary I excretion compared with serum-thyroglobulin. In conclusion, more participants are need to portray I deficiency in a population when using urinary I compared with serum-thyroglobulin, and about ten times more samples are needed in an individual. Adding serum-thyroglobulin to urinary I may inform surveys of I nutrition by allowing subgroup analysis with similar reliability.