Endocrine · 2017
Interference in ACTH immunoassay negatively impacts the management of subclinical hypercortisolism.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yener Serkan, Demir Leyla, Demirpence Mustafa, Mahmut Baris Mustafa, Simsir Ilgin Yildirim, Ozisik Secil, Comlekci Abdurrahman, Demir Tevfik
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Low plasma corticotropin is considered a useful parameter for the diagnosis of subclinical hypercortisolism in patients with an adrenal incidentaloma. However, immunoassays are vulnerable to interference from endogenous antibodies. In this study, subjects who underwent Hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis evaluation for the assessment of subclinical hypercortisolism were evaluated. The objective of the study was to ascertain whether antibody interference in corticotropin immunoassay affected the diagnostic work-up and clinical decisions.
METHODS: The 437 consecutive patients with incidentally discovered adrenal adenomas were included in this single centre study. Patients who had a combination of a nonsuppressed corticotropin concentration (>4.4 pmol/L) and a non-suppressed cortisol concentration after 1 mg overnight dexamethasone suppression test (>50 nmol/L) were selected. Eight eligible subjects without specific features of Cushing's syndrome were identified and recruited for interference studies and follow-up. Nine controls including one patient with unilateral adrenalectomy and one patient with Cushing's disease were recruited as well.
MEASUREMENTS: Eligible subjects and controls were subjected to hormonal tests and investigations for suspected interference. Interference studies included measurement of corticotropin on a different analytical platform, serial dilutions, polyethylene glycol precipitation and heterophilic antibody analysis. Patients were followed with clinical and laboratory parameters for a median duration of 30 (12-90) months.
RESULTS: Antibody interference was identified in four patients. Rheumatoid factor was responsible for the interference in one patient. Clinical management of the patients was affected by the erroneous results. Interference tests were negative in control subjects.
CONCLUSIONS: Erroneous results associated with analytical interference negatively impacted on clinical decision making in this patient group. This should be considered particularly in conditions such as subclinical hypercortisolism which decisions depend on laboratory investigations mainly. Analytical interference could explain the high variability observed both in field measurements from patients who were expected to have lower corticotropin concentrations and in subclinical hypercortisolism prevalence reported by different studies. Many problems can be resolved by ensuring good communication between clinical and laboratory staff.
METHODS: The 437 consecutive patients with incidentally discovered adrenal adenomas were included in this single centre study. Patients who had a combination of a nonsuppressed corticotropin concentration (>4.4 pmol/L) and a non-suppressed cortisol concentration after 1 mg overnight dexamethasone suppression test (>50 nmol/L) were selected. Eight eligible subjects without specific features of Cushing's syndrome were identified and recruited for interference studies and follow-up. Nine controls including one patient with unilateral adrenalectomy and one patient with Cushing's disease were recruited as well.
MEASUREMENTS: Eligible subjects and controls were subjected to hormonal tests and investigations for suspected interference. Interference studies included measurement of corticotropin on a different analytical platform, serial dilutions, polyethylene glycol precipitation and heterophilic antibody analysis. Patients were followed with clinical and laboratory parameters for a median duration of 30 (12-90) months.
RESULTS: Antibody interference was identified in four patients. Rheumatoid factor was responsible for the interference in one patient. Clinical management of the patients was affected by the erroneous results. Interference tests were negative in control subjects.
CONCLUSIONS: Erroneous results associated with analytical interference negatively impacted on clinical decision making in this patient group. This should be considered particularly in conditions such as subclinical hypercortisolism which decisions depend on laboratory investigations mainly. Analytical interference could explain the high variability observed both in field measurements from patients who were expected to have lower corticotropin concentrations and in subclinical hypercortisolism prevalence reported by different studies. Many problems can be resolved by ensuring good communication between clinical and laboratory staff.