一种基于 LC-MS 的指定比较方法,其性能与 Lp(a) 参考测量程序相似,可用于指导摩尔 Lp(a) 标准化。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS Clinical proteomics Pub Date : 2024-01-24 DOI:10.1186/s12014-023-09446-5
Nina M Diederiks, L Renee Ruhaak, Fred P H T M Romijn, Mervin M Pieterse, Nico P M Smit, Christa M Cobbaert
{"title":"一种基于 LC-MS 的指定比较方法,其性能与 Lp(a) 参考测量程序相似,可用于指导摩尔 Lp(a) 标准化。","authors":"Nina M Diederiks, L Renee Ruhaak, Fred P H T M Romijn, Mervin M Pieterse, Nico P M Smit, Christa M Cobbaert","doi":"10.1186/s12014-023-09446-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The 2022 consensus statement of the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) on lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) recognizes the role of Lp(a) as a relevant genetically determined risk factor and recommends its measurement at least once in an individual's lifetime. It also strongly urges that Lp(a) test results are expressed as apolipoprotein (a) (apo(a)) amount of substance in molar units and no longer in confounded Lp(a) mass units (mg/dL or mg/L). Therefore, IVD manufacturers should transition to molar units. A prerequisite for this transition is the availability of an Lp(a) Reference Measurement Procedure (RMP) that allows unequivocal molecular detection and quantification of apo(a) in Lp(a). To that end an ISO 17511:2020 compliant LC-MS based and IFCC-endorsed RMP has been established that targets proteotypic peptides of apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)) in Lp(a). The RMP is laborious and requires highly skilled operators. To guide IVD-manufacturers of immunoassay-based Lp(a) test kits in the transition from mass to molar units, a Designated Comparison Method (DCM) has been developed and evaluated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To assess whether the DCM provides equivalent results compared to the RMP, the procedural designs were compared and the analytical performance of DCM and RMP were first evaluated in a head-to-head comparison. Subsequently, apo(a) was quantified in 153 human clinical serum samples. Both DCM and RMP were calibrated using external native calibrators that produce results traceable to SRM2B. Measurement uncertainty (MU) was checked against predefined allowable MU.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The major difference in the design of the DCM for apo(a) is the use of only one enzymatic digestion step. The analytical performance of the DCM and RMP for apo(a) is highly similar. In a direct method comparison, equivalent results were obtained with a median regression slope 0.997 of and a median bias of - 0.2 nmol/L (- 0.2%); the intermediate imprecision of the test results was within total allowable error (TEa) (CVa of 10.2% at 90 nmol/L).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The semi-automated, higher throughput, LC-MS-based method for Lp(a) meets the predefined analytical performance specifications and allowable MU and is hence applicable as a higher order Designated Comparison Method, which is ideally suited to guide IVD manufacturers in the transition from Lp(a) mass to molar units.</p>","PeriodicalId":10468,"journal":{"name":"Clinical proteomics","volume":"21 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10809433/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An LC-MS-based designated comparison method with similar performance to the Lp(a) reference measurement procedure to guide molar Lp(a) standardization.\",\"authors\":\"Nina M Diederiks, L Renee Ruhaak, Fred P H T M Romijn, Mervin M Pieterse, Nico P M Smit, Christa M Cobbaert\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12014-023-09446-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The 2022 consensus statement of the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) on lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) recognizes the role of Lp(a) as a relevant genetically determined risk factor and recommends its measurement at least once in an individual's lifetime. It also strongly urges that Lp(a) test results are expressed as apolipoprotein (a) (apo(a)) amount of substance in molar units and no longer in confounded Lp(a) mass units (mg/dL or mg/L). Therefore, IVD manufacturers should transition to molar units. A prerequisite for this transition is the availability of an Lp(a) Reference Measurement Procedure (RMP) that allows unequivocal molecular detection and quantification of apo(a) in Lp(a). To that end an ISO 17511:2020 compliant LC-MS based and IFCC-endorsed RMP has been established that targets proteotypic peptides of apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)) in Lp(a). The RMP is laborious and requires highly skilled operators. To guide IVD-manufacturers of immunoassay-based Lp(a) test kits in the transition from mass to molar units, a Designated Comparison Method (DCM) has been developed and evaluated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To assess whether the DCM provides equivalent results compared to the RMP, the procedural designs were compared and the analytical performance of DCM and RMP were first evaluated in a head-to-head comparison. Subsequently, apo(a) was quantified in 153 human clinical serum samples. Both DCM and RMP were calibrated using external native calibrators that produce results traceable to SRM2B. Measurement uncertainty (MU) was checked against predefined allowable MU.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The major difference in the design of the DCM for apo(a) is the use of only one enzymatic digestion step. The analytical performance of the DCM and RMP for apo(a) is highly similar. In a direct method comparison, equivalent results were obtained with a median regression slope 0.997 of and a median bias of - 0.2 nmol/L (- 0.2%); the intermediate imprecision of the test results was within total allowable error (TEa) (CVa of 10.2% at 90 nmol/L).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The semi-automated, higher throughput, LC-MS-based method for Lp(a) meets the predefined analytical performance specifications and allowable MU and is hence applicable as a higher order Designated Comparison Method, which is ideally suited to guide IVD manufacturers in the transition from Lp(a) mass to molar units.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical proteomics\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10809433/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical proteomics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12014-023-09446-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical proteomics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12014-023-09446-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:欧洲动脉粥样硬化学会(EAS)关于脂蛋白(a)(Lp(a))的 2022 年共识声明承认脂蛋白(a)是由基因决定的相关风险因素,并建议在人的一生中至少测量一次脂蛋白(a)。该组织还强烈要求脂蛋白(a)检测结果以摩尔单位表示载脂蛋白(a)(apo(a))的物质的量,而不再以容易混淆的脂蛋白(a)质量单位(毫克/分升或毫克/升)表示。因此,IVD 制造商应向摩尔单位过渡。实现这一过渡的先决条件是要有可对脂蛋白(a)中载脂蛋白(a)进行明确的分子检测和定量的脂蛋白(a)参考测量程序(RMP)。为此,我们建立了一个符合 ISO 17511:2020 标准、基于液相色谱-质谱联用仪(LC-MS)并经 IFCC 认可的 RMP,它以脂蛋白(a)(载脂蛋白(a))的蛋白型肽为目标。RMP 操作费力,需要熟练的操作人员。为了指导基于免疫测定的脂蛋白(a)检测试剂盒的 IVD 生产商从质量单位过渡到摩尔单位,我们开发并评估了一种指定比较方法(DCM):为了评估 DCM 是否能提供与 RMP 相当的结果,首先对程序设计进行了比较,并对 DCM 和 RMP 的分析性能进行了正面比较评估。随后,对 153 份人体临床血清样本中的载脂蛋白(a)进行了定量。DCM 和 RMP 均使用外部本机校准物进行校准,校准结果可溯源至 SRM2B。测量不确定性(MU)与预定义的允许 MU 进行了核对:载脂蛋白(a)的 DCM 设计的主要区别在于只使用了一个酶解步骤。DCM 和 RMP 对载脂蛋白(a)的分析性能非常相似。在直接方法比较中,得到的结果相当,中位回归斜率为 0.997,中位偏差为 - 0.2 nmol/L(- 0.2%);检测结果的中间不精确度在总允许误差 (TEa) 范围内(90 nmol/L 时 CVa 为 10.2%):基于 LC-MS 的半自动化、高通量脂蛋白(a)检测方法符合预定的分析性能指标和允许误差,因此可作为高阶指定比较方法,非常适合指导 IVD 制造商从脂蛋白(a)质量单位过渡到摩尔单位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An LC-MS-based designated comparison method with similar performance to the Lp(a) reference measurement procedure to guide molar Lp(a) standardization.

Background: The 2022 consensus statement of the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) on lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) recognizes the role of Lp(a) as a relevant genetically determined risk factor and recommends its measurement at least once in an individual's lifetime. It also strongly urges that Lp(a) test results are expressed as apolipoprotein (a) (apo(a)) amount of substance in molar units and no longer in confounded Lp(a) mass units (mg/dL or mg/L). Therefore, IVD manufacturers should transition to molar units. A prerequisite for this transition is the availability of an Lp(a) Reference Measurement Procedure (RMP) that allows unequivocal molecular detection and quantification of apo(a) in Lp(a). To that end an ISO 17511:2020 compliant LC-MS based and IFCC-endorsed RMP has been established that targets proteotypic peptides of apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)) in Lp(a). The RMP is laborious and requires highly skilled operators. To guide IVD-manufacturers of immunoassay-based Lp(a) test kits in the transition from mass to molar units, a Designated Comparison Method (DCM) has been developed and evaluated.

Methods: To assess whether the DCM provides equivalent results compared to the RMP, the procedural designs were compared and the analytical performance of DCM and RMP were first evaluated in a head-to-head comparison. Subsequently, apo(a) was quantified in 153 human clinical serum samples. Both DCM and RMP were calibrated using external native calibrators that produce results traceable to SRM2B. Measurement uncertainty (MU) was checked against predefined allowable MU.

Results: The major difference in the design of the DCM for apo(a) is the use of only one enzymatic digestion step. The analytical performance of the DCM and RMP for apo(a) is highly similar. In a direct method comparison, equivalent results were obtained with a median regression slope 0.997 of and a median bias of - 0.2 nmol/L (- 0.2%); the intermediate imprecision of the test results was within total allowable error (TEa) (CVa of 10.2% at 90 nmol/L).

Conclusions: The semi-automated, higher throughput, LC-MS-based method for Lp(a) meets the predefined analytical performance specifications and allowable MU and is hence applicable as a higher order Designated Comparison Method, which is ideally suited to guide IVD manufacturers in the transition from Lp(a) mass to molar units.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical proteomics
Clinical proteomics BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
37
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Proteomics encompasses all aspects of translational proteomics. Special emphasis will be placed on the application of proteomic technology to all aspects of clinical research and molecular medicine. The journal is committed to rapid scientific review and timely publication of submitted manuscripts.
期刊最新文献
Comparative proteomic analysis of human vitreous in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment and diabetic retinopathy reveals a common pathway and potential therapeutic target. Identification of serum N-glycans signatures in three major gastrointestinal cancers by high-throughput N-glycome profiling. Changes in amino acid concentrations and the gut microbiota composition are implicated in the mucosal healing of ulcerative colitis and can be used as noninvasive diagnostic biomarkers. Serum proteomics for the identification of biomarkers to flag predilection of COVID19 patients to various organ morbidities. SPOT: spatial proteomics through on-site tissue-protein-labeling.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1