Harmonizing the calibrator and microorganism used in the folate microbiological assay increases the comparability of serum and whole-blood folate results in a CDC round-robin study

20Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Harmonizing critical reagents for the folate microbiological assay (MBA) may improve among-laboratory comparability. Objective:We assessed the comparability of the MBA for serum folate (S-FOL) and whole-blood folate (WB-FOL) in an international comparison study. Methods: Eight laboratories obtained a kit containing CDC microorganism inoculum (chloramphenicol-resistant Lactobacillus rhamnosus), CDC calibrator (5-methyltetrahydrofolate), and 23 serum and WB hemolysate samples each. Laboratories analyzed the samples in single measurement over 2 d using 4 conditions: in-house microorganism and in-house calibrator (IH-MO & IH-CAL), in-house microorganism and CDC calibrator (IH-MO & CDC-CAL), CDC microorganism and in-house calibrator (CDC-MO & IH-CAL), and CDC microorganism and CDC calibrator (CDC-MO & CDC-CAL). We calculated geometric mean concentrations for each laboratory and condition and compared data to the CDC MBA (target). Results: The among-laboratory arithmetic mean S-FOL concentrations for the 4 conditions were 30.2, 28.1, 30.0, and 29.9 (group 1, 5-methyltetrahydrofolate IH-CAL) compared with 35.3, 33.3, 33.6, and 30.7 nmol/L (group 2, folic acid IH-CAL), respectively; and 428, 405, 398, and 393 (group 1) compared with 469, 423, 477, and 418 nmol/L (group 2), respectively, for WB-FOL. Differences to the CDC MBA target values were smaller for group 1 (range across conditions; S-FOL: 9.9-21%; WB-FOL: 9.0-18%) compared with group 2 laboratories (S-FOL: 13-30%; WB-FOL: 16-32%) and smaller when CDC reagents were used compared with in-house reagents (S-FOL: 12% compared with 22%; WB-FOL: 13%compared with 25%). A linear mixed model estimated a small microorganism effect (S-FOL: 2.3%; WB-FOL: 2.3%) and a larger mean calibrator effect; folic acid compared with 5-methyltetrahydrofolate calibrator produced 12%higher SFOL and 15%higher WB-FOL results. When laboratories used CDC reagents, the estimated among-laboratory variability was ~10% for S-FOL and WB-FOL. Conclusion: Harmonizing the calibrator and microorganism for the folate MBA has the potential to improve the amonglaboratory comparability in future surveys.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhang, M., Sternberg, M. R., & Pfeiffer, C. M. (2018). Harmonizing the calibrator and microorganism used in the folate microbiological assay increases the comparability of serum and whole-blood folate results in a CDC round-robin study. Journal of Nutrition, 148(5), 807–817. https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/nxy030

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free