HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: clinchem.2006.081570v1 53/4/784    most recent Submit an electronic Letter to the Editor about this paper Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wiedmeyer, H.-M. Articles by Palmer, J. P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wiedmeyer, H.-M. Articles by Palmer, J. P. Related Collections Molecular Diagnostics and Genetics

International Comparison of C-Peptide Measurements

¹ Departments of Pathology & Anatomical Sciences and Child Health, University of Missouri-Columbia School of Medicine, Columbia, MO; ² Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO; ³ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Environmental Health Laboratory Sciences, Centers for Environmental Health (F25), Chamblee, GA; ⁴ Benaroya Research Institute, Seattle, WA; ⁵ University of Washington and VA Medical Center, Seattle, WA;

^aaddress correspondence to this author at: Diabetes Diagnostic Laboratory, M767, Departments of Pathology & Anatomical Sciences and Child Health, University of Missouri School of Medicine, 1 Hospital Dr. Columbia, MO 65212; fax 573-884-8823, e-mail: LittleR{at}health.missouri.edu

Abstract

Background: C-peptide measurement has been widely used as a marker of insulin secretion in patients with diabetes. We assessed the comparability of C-peptide results obtained with different methods and by different laboratories and determined whether C-peptide results could be harmonized by normalization with a WHO reference reagent or with plasma.

Methods: We sent 16 different heparin plasma samples to 15 laboratories in 7 countries. The samples were analyzed with 10 different assay methods. A WHO C-peptide standard was also sent to each laboratory and used to determine the feasibility of normalizing results. To assess the impact of calibrator matrix on the comparability of results, we also used the mean results of all laboratories for 4 of the samples to normalize the remaining sample results.

Results: Between-laboratory variability increased with increasing C-peptide concentrations. Normalization of results with WHO reference reagents did not improve comparability, but normalization with samples significantly improved comparability among laboratories and methods. The 95% confidence interval estimate for the SD for the lab/method effect (0.0–0.061) using sample-normalized values did not overlap with the 95% CI estimate with the raw data (0.090–0.225).

Conclusions: C-peptide results generated by different methods and different laboratories do not always agree, especially at higher concentrations of C-peptide. These data support the concept of using a single laboratory for multisite studies and support efforts to harmonize C-peptide measurements by use of calibrators prepared in the sample matrix.

The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:

				S. E. Manley, S. D. Luzio, I. M. Stratton, T. M. Wallace, and P. M.S. Clark Preanalytical, Analytical, and Computational Factors Affect Homeostasis Model Assessment Estimates Diabetes Care, September 1, 2008; 31(9): 1877 - 1883. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. R. Little, C. L. Rohlfing, A. L. Tennill, R. W. Madsen, K. S. Polonsky, G. L. Myers, C. J. Greenbaum, J. P. Palmer, E. Rogatsky, and D. T. Stein Standardization of C-Peptide Measurements Clin. Chem., June 1, 2008; 54(6): 1023 - 1026. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]