Vitamin D 2019 - standardization and chaos. Miniature model of the presentation of laboratory science at present.

Česká verzia

Authors: B. Friedecký; J. Vávrová
Authors place of work: Ústav klinické biochemie a diagnostiky Fakultní nemocnice Hradec Králové
Published in the journal: Klin. Biochem. Metab., 28, 2020, No. 3, p. 114-116

Summary

Current problems of 25 OH vitamin D measurement and interpretation of its results have mixed character. Positive influence of standardization via VDSP and negative chaotic problems caused by using immunochemistry methodology, lack of standardization in 1,25 (OH)2 vitamin D measurement and poor, in practice not applicable methodology for free vitamin D. Some recent publications deal with problems of vitamin D supplementation are main source of data of our introduced work. There is clear that low concentrations of vitamin D are pandemic, but problem of cut off values for deficiency remains. Also personalized approach for vitamin D results is not adequately developed. Information in paper and electronic periodical have often very low quality. Basic factors for increase quality of informatics about supplementation problems are as follows: strict use of reference LC-MS/MS methods in supplementation studies, recalculation of older studies by recalibration of results of their materials from biobanks, use of monitoring CYP24A1by use of VMR (24,25 (OH)2 / 25 (OH).

Keywords:

vitamin D – Metabolites – standardization – supplementation – personalization

Zdroje

1. Cavalier, E., Lukas, P., Bekaert, A. C. et al. Analytical and clinical evaluation of the new Fujirebio Lumipulse G non-competitive assay for 25 (OH)-vitamin D and three immunoassays for 25 (OH)D in healthy subjects, osteoporotic patients, third trimester pregnant women, healthy African subjects, hemodialyzed and intensive care patients. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med., 2016, 54, p. 1347-1355

2. Carter, G. D., Berry, J., Durazo-Arvizu, R. et al. Hydroxyvitamin D assays: An historical perspective from DEQAS. J Steroid. Biochem. Mol. Biol., 2018, 177, p. 30-35

3. American Society for Clinical Pathology 2018. Choosing Wisely ABIM Foundation: Twenty-five things physicians and patients should question.

4. Avenall, A., Bolland, M. J., Grey, A. 25-Hydroxyvitamin D – Should labs be measuring it? Ann. Clin. Biochem., 2019, 56, p. 188-189

5. Brinkley, N., Dawson-Hughes, B., Durazu Arvizu, R. et al. Vitamin D measurement standardization. The way out of chaos. J Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol., 2017, p. 117-123

6. Hayden, J., Bachmann, L. Questioning quality assurance in clinical mass spectrometry. Clin. Lab. News, 2019.

7. Giustina, A., Adler, R. A., Binkley, N. et al. Controversies in vitamin D: Summary statement from an Internationale Conference J Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 2019, 104, p. 234-240.

8. Sempos, C. T. et al. Vitamin D assay and the definitiv of hypovitaminosis D: results from the First International Conference on controversies in vitamin D. Br. J Clin. Pharmacol., 2018, 84, p. 2194-2207.

9. Minisola, S., Ferrone, F., Danese, V. et al. Controversies surrounding vitamin D: focus in supplementation and cancer. Int. J Envirom. Res. Public Health, 2019, doi:10.3390/ijerph16020189.

10. Cavalier, E., Huyghebaert, L., Rousselle, O. et al. Simultaneous measurement of 25 (OH)-vitamin D and 24,25(OH)2-vitamin D to define cut-offs for CYP24A1 mutation and vitamin D deficiency in a population of 1200 young subjects. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med., 2012, http://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2019-0996

11. Herrman, M. Towards a personalized assessment of vitamin D status. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med., 2020, http://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2019-1213

12. Cashman, A. D., Dowling, K. G., Škrabáková, Z. et al. Vitamin D deficiency\in Europe-Pandemic? Am J, Nutr., 2016, 103, p. 1033-1044

13. Editorial. Scientists must rise above politics - and restate their value to society. Nature, 572, 153 (2019) doi:101038/d41586-019-02379-w