Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 1, 2025
A High-Throughput Electrochemiluminescence 7-Plex Assay Simultaneously Screening for Type 1 Diabetes and Multiple Autoimmune Diseases
Published on: May 29, 2020
Comparison of four routinely used vitamin D automated immunoassays
Jindra Windrichova1, Pavel Broz1, Radka Fuchsova2
1University Hospital Pilsen, Department of Immunochemistry Diagnostics, Czech Republic.
Background:
To compare four automated immunoassays for the measurement of 25(OH)-vitamin D (25-OHD) and to assess the impact on the results obtained from a healthy population.
Methods:
We analysed 100 serum samples on Unicel DxI 800 (Beckman Coulter), Architect i1000 (Abbott), Cobas e411 (Roche) and Liaison XL (DiaSorin). Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman plots were used for method comparison. In order to categorise the obtained values, results were categorised into the following groups: 0-25 nmol/L, 25-50 nmol/L, 50-75 nmol/L and above 75 nmol/L and compared. The percentage of samples below 75 nmol/L, and below 50 nmol/L was then calculated for every method.
Results:
According to paired comparisons, each method differs from others (p<0.0001) except Cobas vs Architect, which do not show a statistically significant difference (p=0.39). The strongest correlation was found between Liaison and Architect (ρ=0.94, p<0.0001). The percentage of samples below the recommended value of 75 nmol/L were: 70% (Architect), 92% (Liaison), 71% (Cobas) and 89% (Unicel). The percentage of samples below the value of 50 nmol/L were: 17% (Architect), 55% (Liaison), 28% (Cobas) and 47% (Unicel).
Conclusions:
The observed differences stem from the use of different analytical systems for 25-OHD concentration analysis and can result in different outcomes. The recommended values should be established for each assay in accordance with the data provided by the manufacturer or in the laboratory, in accordance with proper standardisation.
