Multicenter comparison of analytical interferences of 25-OH vitamin D immunoassay and mass spectrometry methods by endogenous interferents and cross-reactivity with 3-epi-25-OH-vitamin D3

Background

Vitamin D (vit-D) deficiency is highly prevalent in the Korean population, highlighting the need for accurate measurements. In this study, the interferences by endogenous and cross-reactive substances were compared between routine vit-D immunoassays and mass spectrometry (MS) methods.

Methods

Two MS methods and 4 immunoassays from different manufacturers (Abbott, Beckman Coulter, Roche, Siemens) were compared. Residual samples that were icteric, lipemic, hemolyzed, high in rheumatoid factor, from myeloma patients, or patients undergoing hemodialysis were collected. Also, 4 levels of National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Standard Reference Material 972a, and 12 samples serially spiked with 3-epi-25-OH-D3 were prepared.

Results

Significant interferences were observed in hemolytic (Roche), icteric (Beckman and Siemens) and lipemic samples (all 4 immunoassays). Level 4 NIST material and 3-epi-25-OH-D3-spiked samples induced significant cross-reactivity, yielding higher total vit-D measurements in non-epimer-separating MS methods, and both the Beckman and Roche immunoassays.

Conclusion

Most observed interferences were consistent with manufacturers' claims, but overall improvement of immunoassay bias limits is required. Awareness of potential interference is important to increase the accuracy of vit-D measurements. Moreover, care is due when interpreting vit-D results of newborns, infants and less commonly, pregnant women, who are known to have physiologically high levels of the highly cross-reactive 3-epi-25-OH-D3.

Hormone Immunoassay Interference: A 2021 Update

Immunoassays are powerful qualitative and quantitative analytical techniques. Since the first description of an immunoassay method in 1959, advances have been made in assay designs and analytical characteristics, opening the door for their widespread implementation in clinical laboratories. Clinical endocrinology is closely linked to laboratory medicine because hormone quantification is important for the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of endocrine disorders. Several interferences in immunoassays have been identified through the years; although some are no longer encountered in daily practice, cross-reaction, heterophile antibodies, biotin, and anti-analyte antibodies still cause problems. Newer interferences are also emerging with the development of new therapies. The interfering substance may be exogenous (e.g., a drug or substance absorbed by the patient) or endogenous (e.g., antibodies produced by the patient), and the bias caused by interference can be positive or negative. The consequences of interference can be deleterious when clinicians consider erroneous results to establish a diagnosis, leading to unnecessary explorations or inappropriate treatments. Clinical laboratories and manufacturers continue to investigate methods for the detection, elimination, and prevention of interferences. However, no system is completely devoid of such incidents. In this review, we focus on the analytical interferences encountered in daily practice and possible solutions for their detection or elimination.

Pre-analytical mysteries: A case of severe hypervitaminosis D and mild hypercalcaemia

We describe a case of severe hypervitaminosis D and mild hypercalcaemia in a 68-year-old woman who presented with fatigue and weight loss. Her 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25OHD) was > 400 nmol/L (50-150) and corrected serum calcium was 2.83 mmol/L (2.1-2.6). Her intact parathyroid hormone (PTH) was 4.9 pmol/L (2.0-9.5). Further investigation revealed an IgM kappa paraprotein, and a bone marrow aspirate confirmed a diagnosis of lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma/Waldenstrom’s macroglobulinemia (LPL/WM). As the vitamin D level was discordant with the patient’s other results and presentation, the presence of an assay interferent was suspected. A 1-in-2 dilution of the sample returned a 25OHD result of 84 nmol/L in keeping with the presence of an interferent. Testing for rheumatoid factor was negative. The sample was treated with an antibody blocking reagent (Scantibodies) and results were not consistent with heterophile antibody interference. The sample was then analysed using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), which returned a 25OHD result of 82 nmol/L. Testing on an alternative immunoassay platform produced a 25OHD result of 75 nmol/L. Reapeted testing on the original platform following reduction of the monoclonal paraprotein with chemotherapy, returned a result of 64 nmol/L. The patient’s mild hypercalcaemia persisted following resolution of the monoclonal paraprotein, in keeping with a diagnosis of primary hyperparathyroidism. This case highlights the potential for paraproteins to cause assay interference, and the importance of considering interference when results are incongruous with the clinical presentation.

Falsely markedly elevated 25-hydroxyvitamin D in patients with monoclonal gammopathies

Objectives

Monoclonal immunoglobulins can cause interference in many laboratory analyses. During a 4 month period we observed seven patients with monoclonal disease and falsely extremely elevated 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) results above 160 ng/mL (>400 nmol/L) measured using an immunoassay from Abbott Diagnostics. Based on these findings, we studied the occurrence of falsely elevated 25(OH)D in samples with paraproteins and investigated possible mechanisms of the observed interference.

Methods

25(OH)D was analyzed using the Architect i2000 platform from Abbott Diagnostics and a higher order method, liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), in serum samples from 50 patients with known monoclonal disease. Patients with falsely elevated 25(OH)D were included in further studies to elucidate the cause of interference. Spuriously elevated results were in addition analyzed on two alternative platforms (Siemens and Roche).

Results

Falsely elevated 25(OH)D levels were present in eight patients on the Abbott analyzer and one on the Siemens platform. Results from Roche were comparable with LC-MS/MS. Additional investigations excluded elevated concentrations of rheumatoid factor and heterophilic antibodies as the cause of interference in the Abbott assay.

Conclusions

Laboratories should be aware of the risk of falsely elevated 25(OH)D in samples run on the Architect analyzer from patients with monoclonal disease. Highly elevated vitamin D results should be diluted and if the dilution is non-linear, rerun by a different method, preferably LC-MS/MS. In patients with spuriously elevated 25(OH)D without known monoclonal disease, the laboratory should consider requesting protein electrophoresis to exclude paraprotein interference.

Falsely Elevated 25-Hydroxy-Vitamin D Levels in Patients with Hypercalcemia

Symptomatic hypercalcemia is a commonly encountered clinical scenario. Though it is important to collect detailed history to find clinical clues connecting to the etiology of hypercalcemia, the diagnostic workup of hypercalcemia depends heavily on laboratory analysis. Accurate measurement of the parathyroid hormone and vitamin D levels is essential. However, commercial laboratory measurement of vitamin D levels can be erroneous in the setting of abundant paraprotein in the serum. One of the most common conditions that can cause an increased amount of paraproteins is multiple myeloma. We report 2 cases of falsely elevated 25-hydroxy-vitamin D levels in patients presenting with hypercalcemia and an underlying diagnosis of MM.