Cited by 111Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlScientific Measurement and Uncertainty EvaluationDiabetes Management and Research

Toward standardization of insulin immunoassays

Open access
Miller, W Greg, Thienpont, Linda M, Van Uytfanghe, Katleen, Clark, Penelope M, Lindstedt, Patrik, Nilsson, Göran, Steffes, Michael W, for the Insulin Standardization Work Group·2009·Clinical Chemistry

Abstract

Background: Measurement of circulating insulin may improve the classification and management of diabetes mellitus and assist in treating people with insulin resistance. Methods: A work group convened by the American Diabetes Association evaluated results for a panel of 39 single donor sera measured by 10 commercial insulin methods from 9 manufacturers against an isotope dilution–liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (IDMS) measurement procedure calibrated using purified recombinant insulin. We used a candidate primary (pure substance) reference material, pooled serum, and single donor sera to evaluate approaches to achieve improved agreement of results between the routine and reference measurement procedures. Results: Four of 10 methods had ≥95% of individual serum results within 32% of the IDMS concentrations. However, the bias vs IDMS was more than 15.5% for 7 of 10 methods in 36%–100% of individual samples. A purified recombinant insulin preparation used as a common calibrator did not improve harmonization of results among routine methods but was not used as instructed by all participants. Calibration using serum pools achieved bias <15.5% for nearly all results in the concentration range covered by the pools (>60 pmol/L). Calibration using a panel of individual sera was the most effective to improve harmonization of results over the full measuring range. Conclusions: Agreement among methods can be improved by establishing traceability to the IDMS procedure using a panel of native sera. Pooled sera may be useful as trueness control materials. The usefulness of the pure insulin primary reference material [candidate reference material for insulin (cRMI)] requires clarification of protocols used by manufacturers.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1373/clinchem.2008.118380

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • An insulin standardization workgroup called for harmonization of insulin assay results through traceability to an isotope-dilution liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry reference.

    “Recently, an insulin standardization workgroup of the ADA, in conjunction with the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, the CDC, and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes, called for harmonization of insulin assay results through traceability to an isotopedilution liquid chromatography-tandom mass spectrometry reference (373).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Miller, W. G., Thienpont, L. M., Van Uytfanghe, K., Clark, P. M., Lindstedt, P., Nilsson, G., Steffes, M. W., & for the Insulin Standardization Work Group
Affiliations
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
  • Ghent University (BE)
  • Laboratory for Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Gent University, Gent, Belgium
  • University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Mercodia, Uppsala, Sweden
  • Nilsson Measurement Quality, Uppsala, Sweden
  • University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Miller, W Greg
Venue
Clinical Chemistry
Published
2009-05-01
Volume
55
Issue
5
Pages
1011-1018
ISSN
  • 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8561
OpenAlex
W2041172413
Cited by
111
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 8
FWCI
6.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • American Diabetes Association
  • GlaxoSmithKline
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Scientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
Keywords
insulin immunoassay, assay standardization, reference measurement procedure, measurement agreement, measurement bias, traceability, diabetes mellitus, insulin resistance
MeSH terms
Diabetes Mellitus, Humans, Immunoassay, Insulin, Radioisotope Dilution Technique, Reagent Kits, Diagnostic, Spectrometry, Mass, Electrospray Ionization

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