Critical issues of PTH assays in CKD

Critical Governance Issue of Parathyroid Hormone Assays and its Selection in the Management of Chronic Kidney Disease Mineral and Bone Disorders

Measurement of circulating parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels is essential for optimal management of mineral and bone disorders (MBD) in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. There are two major types of PTH assays currently in use: intact parathyroid hormone (i-PTH) and whole PTH (w-PTH) assays. The i-PTH assay is the current standard, and considerable information regarding the management of CKD-MBD has been obtained with this method. However, several limitations have been found with the i-PTH assay. One limitation is that i-PTH assay also measures fragments other than full-length PTH (1-84). Another limitation is the existence of multiple readout methods of the i-PTH assay. The w-PTH assay is theoretically ideal because it exclusively detects full-length PTH (1-84). However, clinical data proving the advantages of w-PTH measurement are not sufficient. For uremic patients, Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes suggest that PTH levels should be maintained within approximately two to nine times the upper normal limit of the i-PTH assays. The most critical issue in the evaluation of PTH levels is the lack of definitive PTH assay method. Evidence-based recommendations on clinical management goals of PTH are warranted.

Comparison of Intact PTH and Bio-Intact PTH Assays Among Non-Dialysis Dependent Chronic Kidney Disease Patients

BACKGROUND

The third-generation bio-intact parathyroid hormone (PTH) (1-84) assay was designed to overcome problems associated with the detection of C-terminal fragments by the second-generation intact PTH assay. The two assays have been compared primarily among dialysis populations. The present study evaluated the correlations and differences between these two PTH assays among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages 3 to 5 not yet on dialysis.

METHODS

Blood samples were collected from 98 patients with CKD stages 3 to 5. PTH concentrations were measured simultaneously by using the second-generation - PTH intact-STAT and third-generation bio-intact 1-84 PTH assays. Other serum biomarkers of bone mineral disorders were also assessed. CKD stage was calculated by using the CKD-Epidemiology Collaboration (EPI) formula.

RESULTS

Serum bio-intact PTH concentrations were strongly correlated but significantly lower than the intact PTH concentrations (r=0.963, P<0.0001). This finding was consistent among CKD stages 3 to 5. PTH concentrations by both assays (intact and bio-intact PTH) positively correlated with urea (r=0.523, r=0.504; P=0.002, respectively), phosphorus (r=0.532, r=0.521; P<0.0001, respectively) and negatively correlated with blood calcium (r=-0.435, r=-0.476; P<0.0001, respectively), 25(OH) vitamin D, (r=-0.319, r=-0.353; respectively, P<0.0001) and the estimated glomerular filtration rate (r=-0.717, r=-0.688; P<0.0001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with CKD stages 3 to 5 not on dialysis, the bio-intact PTH assay detected significantly lower PTH concentrations compared with intact PTH assay. Additional studies that correlate the diagnosis and management of CKD mineral and bone disorders with bone histomorphometric findings are needed to determine whether bio-intact PTH assay results are better surrogate markers in these early stages of CKD.