Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter September 21, 2011

Variations in assay protocol for the Dako cystatin C method may change patient results by 50% without changing the results for controls

  • Mats Flodin , Lars-Olof Hansson and Anders Larsson

Abstract

Background: Cystatin C is increasingly used as a glomerular filtration marker, but so far only a few companies produce most of the cystatin C reagents suited for turbidimetry or nephelometry use in clinical laboratories.

Methods: We studied different protocols for measuring cystatin C on an Architect ci8200 system using cystatin C reagents from Dako (Glostrup, Denmark). The results were compared with those obtained with Dade Behring reagents (Deerfield, IL, USA) on a BN ProSpec system.

Results: Differences in assay protocol on the same instrument with the Dako reagent yielded an up to 50% difference in glomerular filtration rate calculated from the cystatin C results when analyzing patient samples, but had no effect on the results for controls. There were also significant differences regarding linearity and kinetics between samples and controls/calibrators.

Conclusions: The results indicate different reactivity of the Dako antibodies against calibrators and controls in comparison with patient samples, highlighting the importance of using controls and calibrators that do not differ from patient samples.

Clin Chem Lab Med 2006;44:1481–5.


Corresponding author: Anders Larsson, Department of Medical Sciences, University Hospital, 751 85 Uppsala, Sweden Phone: +46-18-6110000, Fax: +46-18-552562,

References

1. Kemperman FA, Krediet RT, Arisz L. Formula-derived prediction of the glomerular filtration rate from plasma creatinine concentration. Nephron 2002; 91:547–58.10.1159/000065012Search in Google Scholar PubMed

2. Schwartz GJ, Haycock GB, Edelmann CM Jr, Spitzer A. A simple estimate of glomerular filtration rate in children derived from body length and plasma creatinine. Pediatrics 1976; 58:259–63.10.1542/peds.58.2.259Search in Google Scholar

3. Cockcroft DW, Gault MH. Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinine. Nephron 1976; 16:31–41.10.1159/000180580Search in Google Scholar PubMed

4. Levey AS, Bosch JP, Lewis JB, Greene T, Rogers N, Roth D. A more accurate method to estimate glomerular filtration rate from serum creatinine: a new prediction equation. Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study Group. Ann Intern Med 1999; 130:461–70.10.7326/0003-4819-130-6-199903160-00002Search in Google Scholar PubMed

5. Hsu CY, Chertow GM, Curhan GC. Methodological issues in studying the epidemiology of mild to moderate chronic renal insufficiency. Kidney Int 2002; 61:1567–76.10.1046/j.1523-1755.2002.00299.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

6. Sherman DS, Fish DN, Teitelbaum I. Assessing renal function in cirrhotic patients: problems and pitfalls. Am J Kidney Dis 2003; 41:269–78.10.1053/ajkd.2003.50035Search in Google Scholar PubMed

7. Dharnidharka VR, Kwon C, Stevens G. Serum cystatin C is superior to serum creatinine as a marker of kidney function: a meta-analysis. Am J Kidney Dis 2002; 40:221–6.10.1053/ajkd.2002.34487Search in Google Scholar PubMed

8. Grubb A, Nyman U, Bjork J, Lindstrom V, Rippe B, Sterner G, et al. Simple cystatin C-based prediction equations for glomerular filtration rate compared with the modification of diet in renal disease prediction equation for adults and the Schwartz and the Counahan-Barratt prediction equations for children. Clin Chem 2005; 51:1420–31.10.1373/clinchem.2005.051557Search in Google Scholar PubMed

9. Larsson A, Malm J, Grubb A, Hansson LO. Calculation of glomerular filtration rate expressed in mL/min from plasma cystatin C values in mg/L. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2004; 64:25–30.10.1080/00365510410003723Search in Google Scholar PubMed

10. Sjostrom P, Tidman M, Jones I. Determination of the production rate and non-renal clearance of cystatin C and estimation of the glomerular filtration rate from the serum concentration of cystatin C in humans. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2005; 65:111–24.10.1080/00365510510013523Search in Google Scholar PubMed

11. Kort SA, Bouman AA, Nijhof JH, van Blerk IO, Blankenstein MA. Evaluation of two commercially available Cystatin C assays, Matrix effect? Clin Chem 2006; 52(Suppl):A158.Search in Google Scholar

12. Mergulhao FJ, Summers DK, Monteiro GA. Recombinant protein secretion in Escherichia coli. Biotechnol Adv 2005; 23:177–202.10.1016/j.biotechadv.2004.11.003Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2006-3-16
Accepted: 2006-9-26
Published Online: 2011-9-21
Published in Print: 2006-12-1

©2006 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin New York

Downloaded on 19.5.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/CCLM.2006.271/html
Scroll to top button