Received on August 1, 2006
Accepted on March 20, 2007

Endocrinology and Metabolism

Evaluation of a 1,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D Enzyme Immunoassay

¹ Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada
² Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada, and Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: rvieth{at}mtsinai.on.ca.

Background: Radioactive reagents are used in most assays for measurement of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)₂D]. We evaluated a 1,25(OH)₂D enzyme immunoassay (EIA) from IDS Ltd. that uses solid-phase immunoextraction and colorimetric detection and compared results to those of the thymus radioreceptor assay (RRA) for 1,25(OH)₂D.

Methods: We collected serum samples (n = 145) representing an even distribution (0-200 pmol/L) of 1,25(OH)₂D concentrations and Vitamin D External Quality Assessment Scheme (DEQAS) proficiency survey samples from 2004 surveys (n = 15) and stored them at -20 °C. We analyzed all samples with both EIA and RRA methods. We calculated imprecision using 5 QC samples in quadruplicate in each run (n = 6), including both pooled patient material used for QC with the RRA and QC material included in the EIA reagent set. We evaluated calibration stability by analyzing calibrators from different lots on the same plate and determining if calculated sample values drifted significantly.

Results: Deming linear regression between IDS EIA and RRA methods yielded slope 1.25 (95% CI 1.13-1.37), y-intercept -3 (95% CI -18 to 12), R² = 0.74. DEQAS proficiency survey samples for 2004 were all within 30% of the all-methods-trimmed mean. Imprecision CVs were 12%-16% within-run and 15%-20% between-run.

Conclusions: We find no evidence of inferiority to the classic calf-thymus receptor assay for 1,25(OH)₂D and no disadvantage in the results generated by the IDS EIA using samples from the major proficiency survey for 1,25(OH)₂D. According to the product insert, however, the IDS EIA underestimates 1,25(OH)₂D₂ compared with the D₃ form.