{"title":"Advances and challenges in the measurement of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D: a comprehensive review.","authors":"Zhicheng Jin, Roger L Bertholf, Xin Yi","doi":"10.1080/10408363.2023.2212765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Vitamin D has received significant attention from clinical societies, researchers, and the general population in recent years. While 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) is the most commonly-used biomarker of vitamin D status, 1α,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)<sub>2</sub>D), its bioactive form, plays a critical role in regulating calcium and phosphorus homeostasis and is also involved in the immune system and cellular differentiation. Consequently, accurate measurements of 1,25(OH)<sub>2</sub>D can aid in the differential diagnosis of calcium-related disorders such as hypocalcemia in vitamin D-dependent rickets and hypercalcemia due to inappropriate increase of serum 1,25(OH)<sub>2</sub>D in granulomatous diseases. However, due to its lipophilicity and very low circulating concentration, the measurement of 1,25(OH)<sub>2</sub>D is particularly challenging. Over the past several decades, numerous efforts have been made to develop sensitive, specific, and practical laboratory methods for measuring 1,25(OH)<sub>2</sub>D. Methods using radioreceptor assay, radioimmunoassay, enzyme immunoassay, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, automated chemiluminescent immunoassay, and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry have been described. Each of these methods has unique advantages and limitations, and some are no longer used. Despite the sophisticated methods in use today, substantial variations between methods still exist. A concerted effort toward standardization of 1,25(OH)<sub>2</sub>D measurement is needed to ensure accurate and reliable results across laboratories and methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":10760,"journal":{"name":"Critical reviews in clinical laboratory sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical reviews in clinical laboratory sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10408363.2023.2212765","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Vitamin D has received significant attention from clinical societies, researchers, and the general population in recent years. While 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) is the most commonly-used biomarker of vitamin D status, 1α,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D), its bioactive form, plays a critical role in regulating calcium and phosphorus homeostasis and is also involved in the immune system and cellular differentiation. Consequently, accurate measurements of 1,25(OH)2D can aid in the differential diagnosis of calcium-related disorders such as hypocalcemia in vitamin D-dependent rickets and hypercalcemia due to inappropriate increase of serum 1,25(OH)2D in granulomatous diseases. However, due to its lipophilicity and very low circulating concentration, the measurement of 1,25(OH)2D is particularly challenging. Over the past several decades, numerous efforts have been made to develop sensitive, specific, and practical laboratory methods for measuring 1,25(OH)2D. Methods using radioreceptor assay, radioimmunoassay, enzyme immunoassay, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, automated chemiluminescent immunoassay, and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry have been described. Each of these methods has unique advantages and limitations, and some are no longer used. Despite the sophisticated methods in use today, substantial variations between methods still exist. A concerted effort toward standardization of 1,25(OH)2D measurement is needed to ensure accurate and reliable results across laboratories and methods.
期刊介绍:
Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences publishes comprehensive and high quality review articles in all areas of clinical laboratory science, including clinical biochemistry, hematology, microbiology, pathology, transfusion medicine, genetics, immunology and molecular diagnostics. The reviews critically evaluate the status of current issues in the selected areas, with a focus on clinical laboratory diagnostics and latest advances. The adjective “critical” implies a balanced synthesis of results and conclusions that are frequently contradictory and controversial.