Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Good Agreement Between Hba1c Analyzed Using Capillary Electrophoresis, HPLC, Immunological and Enzymatic Methods
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Sciences, Clinical Chemistry.
Equalis, Uppsala, Sweden.
Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institute, Clinical Chemistry, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Laboratory Medicine, Norra Älvsborgs Länssjukhus NÄL,Uddevalla Hospital, Uddevalla, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2019 (English)In: Journal of Diabetes, Metabolism and its Complications, Vol. 1, no 1, p. 1-7Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose: Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is an essential marker for assessment of glycemic control in diabetes patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the agreement between different HbA1c methods.

Methodology: We used blood samples to compare HbA1c results analyzed with Capillarys 3 Tera, Roche Tina-Quant HbA1c Gen 3, BioRad Variant II Turbo (3 sites), Mono S® and Abbott Architect enzymatic method. The comparisons were made as paired instrument comparisons with Capillarys 3 Tera.

Results: The linear correlations between the HbA1c methods were as follows:

Cobas 6000 = 0.982 x Capillarys 3 Tera + 0.975, R² = 0.994;

Architect c8000 = 0.982 x Capillarys 3 Tera + 1.064, R² = 0.994; Mono S® = 0.916 x Capillarys 3 Tera + 3.397, R² = 0.965;

BioRad Variant II Turbo = 0.923 x Capillarys 3 Tera + 4.062, R² = 0.990; Tosoh G8 = 0.963 x Capillarys 3 Tera + 3.895, R² = 0.996.

Conclusions: The different instrument platforms showed the best agreement in the 50-70 mmol/mol interval. Above and below this range the methods separated into 2 groups, one consisting of Capillarys 3 Tera, Roche Tina-Quant and Abbott enzymatic method and the other group consisting of BioRad Variant II Turbo, Tosoh G8 and Mono S®.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2019. Vol. 1, no 1, p. 1-7
National Category
Clinical Laboratory Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-394130DOI: 10.31487/j.JDMC.2019.01.03OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-394130DiVA, id: diva2:1357330
Available from: 2019-10-03 Created: 2019-10-03 Last updated: 2019-10-11Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(434 kB)50 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 434 kBChecksum SHA-512
8aa3b488a980eb123df21b736c181b8dfb0883c4423e8abc4d4f5596fd30f71b99fe3d255d05b59cc2ce9dab7a58271f9537b80c4feb6ee84395085289303b71
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Rollborn, NiclasÅkerfeldt, TorbjörnHansson, Lars-OlofLarsson, Anders
By organisation
Clinical Chemistry
Clinical Laboratory Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 50 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 80 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf