Comparison of two methods for dimethylarginines quantification
The result's identifiers
Result code in IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00669806%3A_____%2F24%3A10477054" target="_blank" >RIV/00669806:_____/24:10477054 - isvavai.cz</a>
Alternative codes found
RIV/00216208:11140/24:10477054
Result on the web
<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=YnesWtWrin" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=YnesWtWrin</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plabm.2024.e00359" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.plabm.2024.e00359</a>
Alternative languages
Result language
angličtina
Original language name
Comparison of two methods for dimethylarginines quantification
Original language description
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.
Czech name
—
Czech description
—
Classification
Type
J<sub>imp</sub> - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database
CEP classification
—
OECD FORD branch
30100 - Basic medicine
Result continuities
Project
—
Continuities
I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Others
Publication year
2024
Confidentiality
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Data specific for result type
Name of the periodical
Practical Laboratory Medicine
ISSN
2352-5517
e-ISSN
2352-5517
Volume of the periodical
39
Issue of the periodical within the volume
March
Country of publishing house
NL - THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS
Number of pages
8
Pages from-to
e00359
UT code for WoS article
001175273100001
EID of the result in the Scopus database
2-s2.0-85183763540