Comparison of IFCC-calibrated HbA1c from laboratory and point of care testing systems

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Authors

  • Susan E. Manley
  • Laura J. Hikin
  • Rachel A. Round
  • Peter W. Manning
  • Stephen D. Luzio
  • Gareth J. Dunseath
  • Irene M. Stratton
  • Robert Cramb
  • Kenneth A. Sikaris
  • Jonathan Webber

Colleges, School and Institutes

Abstract

Objective
WHO, IDF and ADA recommend HbA1c ≥6.5% (48 mmol/mol) for diagnosis of diabetes with pre-diabetes 6.0% (42 mmol/mol) [WHO] or 5.7% (39 mmol/mol) [ADA] to 6.4% (47 mmol/mol). We have compared HbA1c from several methods for research relating glycaemic markers.
Research design and methods
HbA1c was measured in EDTA blood from 128 patients with diabetes on IE HPLC analysers (Bio-Rad Variant II NU, Menarini HA8160 and Tosoh G8), point of care systems, POCT, (A1cNow+ disposable cartridges and DCA 2000®+ analyser), affinity chromatography (Primus Ultra2) and the IFCC secondary reference method (Menarini HA8160 calibrated using IFCC SRM protocol).
Results
Median (IQ range) on IFCC SRM was 7.5% (6.8–8.4) (58(51–68) mmol/mol) HbA1c with minimum 5.3%(34 mmol/mol)/maximum 11.9%(107 mmol/mol). There were positive offsets between IFCC SRM and Bio-Rad Variant II NU, mean difference (1SD), +0.33%(0.17) (+3.6(1.9) mmol/mol), r2 = 0.984, p < 0.001 and Tosoh G8, +0.22%(0.20) (2.4(2.2) mmol/mol), r2 = 0.976, p < 0.001 with a very small negative difference −0.04%(0.11) (−0.4(1.2) mmol/mol), r2 = 0.992, p < 0.001 for Menarini HA8160. POCT methods were less precise with negative offsets for DCA 2000®+ analyser −0.13%(0.28) (−1.4(3.1) mmol/mol), r2 = 0.955, p < 0.001 and A1cNow+ cartridges −0.70%(0.67) (−7.7(7.3) mmol/mol), r2 = 0.699, p < 0.001 (n = 113). Positive biases for Tosoh and Bio-Rad (compared with IFCC SRM) have been eliminated by subsequent revision of calibration.
Conclusions
Small differences observed between IFCC-calibrated and NGSP certified methods across a wide HbA1c range were confirmed by quality control and external quality assurance. As these offsets affect estimates of diabetes prevalence, the analyser (and calibrator) employed should be considered when evaluating diagnostic data.

Details

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)364-372
JournalDiabetes Research and Clinical Practice
Volume105
Issue number3
Early online date22 May 2014
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2014

Keywords

  • IFCC-calibrated HbA1c, HbA1c measurement, Diagnosis, Diabetes, Pre-diabetes