Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32774123›Full record

ArticleBiochemia medica2020

Analytical bias of automated immunoassays for six serum steroid hormones assessed by LC-MS/MS.

Željko Debeljak, Ivana Marković, Jasna Pavela, Iva Lukić, Dario Mandić, Sanja Mandić, Vesna Horvat, Vatroslav Šerić

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biochemia medica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. [Development of an LC-MS/MS method for 32 steroid hormones and exploration of their gestational variations].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Improving Science by Overcoming Laboratory Pitfalls With Hormone Measurements.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Željko DebeljakClinical Institute of Laboratory Diagnostics, Osijek University Hospital, Osijek, Croatia.
Ivana MarkovićClinical Institute of Laboratory Diagnostics, Osijek University Hospital, Osijek, Croatia.
Jasna PavelaClinical Institute of Laboratory Diagnostics, Osijek University Hospital, Osijek, Croatia.
Iva LukićClinical Institute of Laboratory Diagnostics, Osijek University Hospital, Osijek, Croatia.
Dario MandićClinical Institute of Laboratory Diagnostics, Osijek University Hospital, Osijek, Croatia.
Sanja MandićClinical Institute of Laboratory Diagnostics, Osijek University Hospital, Osijek, Croatia.
Vesna HorvatClinical Institute of Laboratory Diagnostics, Osijek University Hospital, Osijek, Croatia.
Vatroslav ŠerićClinical Institute of Laboratory Diagnostics, Osijek University Hospital, Osijek, Croatia.
University of Osijek · HR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is a growing amount of evidence showing the significant analytical bias of steroid hormone immunoassays, but large number of available immunoassays makes conduction of a single comprehensive study of this issue hardly feasible. Aim of this study was to assess the analytical bias of six heterogeneous immunoassays for serum aldosterone, cortisol, dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate (DHEAS), testosterone, 17-hydroxyprogesterone (OHP) and progesterone using the liquid chromatography coupled to the tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). MATERIALS AND

methodsThis method comparison study included 49 serum samples. Testosterone, DHEAS, progesterone and cortisol immunoassays were performed on the Abbott Architect i2000SR or Alinity i analysers (Abbott Diagnostics, Chicago, USA). DiaSorin's Liaison (DiaSorin, Saluggia, Italy) and DIAsource's ETI-Max 3000 analysers (DIAsource ImmunoAssays, Louvain-La-Neuve, Belgium) were chosen for aldosterone and OHP immunoassay testing, respectively. All immunoassays were evaluated against the LC-MS/MS assay relying on the commercial kit (Chromsystems, Gräfelfing, Germany) and LCMS-8050 analyser (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan). Analytical biases were calculated and method comparison was conducted using weighted Deming regression analysis.

resultsDepending on the analyte and specific immunoassay, mean relative biases ranged from -31 to + 137%. Except for the cortisol, immunoassays were positively biased. For none of the selected steroids slope and intercept 95% confidence intervals simultaneously contained 0 and 1, respectively.

conclusionsEvaluated immunoassays failed to satisfy requirements for methods' comparability and produced significant analytical biases in respect to the LC-MS/MS assay, especially at low concentrations.

Indexed as

Chromatography, High Pressure LiquidImmunoassayTandem Mass Spectrometry17-alpha-HydroxyprogesteroneAdultAldosteroneAutomationBiasDehydroepiandrosterone SulfateFemaleHumansHydrocortisoneMaleMiddle AgedProgesteroneReagent Kits, Diagnostic17-alpha-HydroxyprogesteroneAldosteroneDehydroepiandrosterone SulfateHydrocortisoneProgesteroneReagent Kits, DiagnosticSteroidsTestosteronebiasimmunoassayLC-MS/MSmethod comparisonsteroid hormone

Identifiers

PMID32774123
PMCPMC7394251
OpenAlexW3046563865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.