-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Comparison of two methods for dimethylarginines quantification
V. Sudová, P. Prokop, L. Trefil, J. Racek, D. Rajdl
Status neindexováno Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
NLK
Directory of Open Access Journals
od 2015
PubMed Central
od 2015
Open Access Digital Library
od 2015-04-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
od 2015
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
OBJECTIVES: Both dimethylarginines are widely bound to chronic kidney disease (CKD). This study was focused to validate published LC-MS/MS method and compared the measured data with an immunoassay. DESIGN AND METHODS: The analysis was performed on a Dionex UltiMate 3000 UHPLC-Standard (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA) with an amaZon SL ion trap (Bruker, Billerica, Massachusetts, USA). Comparison was evaluated by using Passing Bablok regression and Bland Altman plot. Healthy volunteers (n = 40) were used for validation and as control group to patients group (n = 40) with different stages of CKD. RESULTS: The results in healthy controls determined by the LC-MS/MS (ELISA) method were 0.52 ± 0.0892 with 95 % CI: 0.49-0.55 (0.61 ± 0.1213 with 95 % CI: 0.57-0.64) μmol/L for AD MA and 0.56 ± 0.0810 with 95 % CI: 0.53-0.58 (0.62 ± 0.0752 with 95 % CI: 0.57-0.65) μmol/L for SDMA. In the same way, the patient group values determined by the LC-MS/MS (ELISA) method were 0.82 ± 0.1604 with 95 % CI: 0.75-0.88 (1.06 ± 0.3002 with 95 % CI: 0.94-1.19) μmol/L and 2.14 ± 0.8778 with 95 % CI: 1.47-2.58 (1.65 ± 0.5160 with 95 % CI: 1.40-1.98) μmol/L for ADMA and SDMA, respectively. The correlation between the methods, expressed as the Spearman correlation coefficient (R), was 0.858 (0.8059) for ADMA (p < 0.0001) and 0.895 (0.9607) for SDMA (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: ADMA levels determined by the immunoassay were almost 30 % overestimated, in contrast to SDMA levels, which were 3 % underestimated. According to our findings, a better correlation could be obtained by simple sample dilution.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc24005684
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20250428114253.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 240405e20240117ne f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1016/j.plabm.2024.e00359 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)38313812
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a ne
- 100 1_
- $a Sudová, Vendula $u Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Alej Svobody 1655/76, Pilsen, 32300, Czech Republic $u Department of Clinical Biochemistry and Haematology, Charles University and University Hospital, Pilsen, Czech Republic
- 245 10
- $a Comparison of two methods for dimethylarginines quantification / $c V. Sudová, P. Prokop, L. Trefil, J. Racek, D. Rajdl
- 520 9_
- $a OBJECTIVES: Both dimethylarginines are widely bound to chronic kidney disease (CKD). This study was focused to validate published LC-MS/MS method and compared the measured data with an immunoassay. DESIGN AND METHODS: The analysis was performed on a Dionex UltiMate 3000 UHPLC-Standard (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA) with an amaZon SL ion trap (Bruker, Billerica, Massachusetts, USA). Comparison was evaluated by using Passing Bablok regression and Bland Altman plot. Healthy volunteers (n = 40) were used for validation and as control group to patients group (n = 40) with different stages of CKD. RESULTS: The results in healthy controls determined by the LC-MS/MS (ELISA) method were 0.52 ± 0.0892 with 95 % CI: 0.49-0.55 (0.61 ± 0.1213 with 95 % CI: 0.57-0.64) μmol/L for AD MA and 0.56 ± 0.0810 with 95 % CI: 0.53-0.58 (0.62 ± 0.0752 with 95 % CI: 0.57-0.65) μmol/L for SDMA. In the same way, the patient group values determined by the LC-MS/MS (ELISA) method were 0.82 ± 0.1604 with 95 % CI: 0.75-0.88 (1.06 ± 0.3002 with 95 % CI: 0.94-1.19) μmol/L and 2.14 ± 0.8778 with 95 % CI: 1.47-2.58 (1.65 ± 0.5160 with 95 % CI: 1.40-1.98) μmol/L for ADMA and SDMA, respectively. The correlation between the methods, expressed as the Spearman correlation coefficient (R), was 0.858 (0.8059) for ADMA (p < 0.0001) and 0.895 (0.9607) for SDMA (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: ADMA levels determined by the immunoassay were almost 30 % overestimated, in contrast to SDMA levels, which were 3 % underestimated. According to our findings, a better correlation could be obtained by simple sample dilution.
- 590 __
- $a NEINDEXOVÁNO
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Prokop, Pavel, $u Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Alej Svobody 1655/76, Pilsen, 32300, Czech Republic $u Department of Clinical Biochemistry and Haematology, Charles University and University Hospital, Pilsen, Czech Republic $d 1985- $7 xx0331798
- 700 1_
- $a Trefil, Ladislav $u Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Alej Svobody 1655/76, Pilsen, 32300, Czech Republic $u Department of Clinical Biochemistry and Haematology, Charles University and University Hospital, Pilsen, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Racek, Jaroslav $u Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Alej Svobody 1655/76, Pilsen, 32300, Czech Republic $u Department of Clinical Biochemistry and Haematology, Charles University and University Hospital, Pilsen, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Rajdl, Daniel $u Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Alej Svobody 1655/76, Pilsen, 32300, Czech Republic $u Department of Clinical Biochemistry and Haematology, Charles University and University Hospital, Pilsen, Czech Republic
- 773 0_
- $w MED00194320 $t Practical laboratory medicine $x 2352-5517 $g Roč. 39 (20240117), s. e00359
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38313812 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20240405 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20250428114248 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2075992 $s 1215446
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-PubMed-not-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2024 $b 39 $c - $d e00359 $e 20240117 $i 2352-5517 $m Practical laboratory medicine $n Pract Lab Med $x MED00194320
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20240405