Cited by 13Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlDiabetes Management and ResearchAdvanced Glycation End Products research

Assessment of two glycated hemoglobin immunoassays

Guadalupe Vargas, M., Pazmiño Gomez, B.J., Vera Lorenti, F.E., Álvarez Condo, G.M., Rodas Neira, E.I., Veron, D., Fernández Veron, M., Cercado, A.G. +3 more·2020·Endocrinología, Diabetes y Nutrición

Abstract

Introduction Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level reflects chronic glycemic status if reliable tests are used, however, in some regions worldwide high performing assays might not be readily available. This study aimed to asses two HbA1c immunoassays, comparing them with high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) assay, three methods available in Ecuador. Material and methods HbA1c were measured in 114 fresh whole blood-samples by DCA-Vantage point-of-care analyzer, I-Chroma portable fluorescent scanner immunoassay and BioRad Variant II Turbo HPLC. Normal and pathological HbA1c ranges were included. Blood samples with variants of hemoglobin were excluded. HbA1c values were expressed in National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program percentages and mmol/mol, as mean±standard deviation. Results HbA1c results by HPLC and DCA-Vantage were similar: 6.3±1.7% (45±18.6mmol/mol) vs. 6.3±1.8% (45±19.7mmol/mol), respectively, P=0.057; while HbA1c values by I-Chroma were lower than HPLC, 5.8±1.9% (40±20.8mmol/mol), P Conclusion HbA1c immunoassays DCA-Vantage was comparable to HPLC assay, showing good correlation, appropriate precision and low bias, whereas I-Chroma assay was precise but inaccurate. Therefore, DCA-Vantage has better performance than I-Chroma. These findings suggest that is convenient to assess the HbA1c immunoassays commercially available in our country, Ecuador.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.endinu.2019.09.011

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 27 · Cited by 13

Authors
Guadalupe Vargas, M., Pazmiño Gomez, B. J., Vera Lorenti, F. E., Álvarez Condo, G. M., Rodas Neira, E. I., Veron, D., Fernández Veron, M., Cercado, A. G., Bahar, B., Tufro, A., & Veron, D.
Affiliations
  • Universidad Estatal de Milagro (EC)
  • Yale University (US)
Venue
Endocrinología, Diabetes y Nutrición
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-05
Volume
67
Issue
5
Pages
297-303
ISSN
2530-0164 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2994856420
Cited by
13
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 3
FWCI
0.52
Type
journal article
Language
es
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Endocrinología Diabetes y Nutrición (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Secretary of Education Superior, Science, Technology and Innovation of Ecuador
  • State University of Milagro (UNEMI-OCAS-SO-27092013-N°26 DV2013–2014, UNEMI-OCAS-SO-03072014-N8-DV2014-2015, UNEMI-OCAS-SO-30052016-N5-DV2015-2017)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Clinical Biochemistry › Advanced Glycation End Products research
Keywords
HbA1c, point-of-care testing, HPLC comparison, assay precision and accuracy, diabetes monitoring, method comparison, resource-limited settings
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid, Ecuador, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Immunoassay, Male, Middle Aged

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review