Cited by 55Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlDiabetes Management and ResearchHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders

Evaluation of a fully automated high-performance liquid chromatography assay for hemoglobin A1c

Khuu, Hanh M., Robinson, C. Andrew, Goolsby, Kathy, Hardy, Robert W., Konrad, Robert J.·1999·Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Measurement of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is used as an objective measure of long-term blood glucose control in diabetic patients. Recent improvements in automation combined with new recommendations for precision and accuracy have caused us to reevaluate our methods for measuring HbA1c. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated a newly automated high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) instrument for measurement of HbA1c (Tosoh A1c 2.2 Plus Glycohemoglobin Analyzer, Tosoh Medics, Foster City, Calif) and compared the results obtained by HPLC to those obtained with an immunoassay (Hitachi 911, Boehringer Mannheim Corporation, Indianapolis, Ind). RESULTS: The Tosoh analyzer was found to be linear in a range of 5.3% to 17% and had a throughput of 20 samples per hour. HbA1c results for 102 patient samples by the 2 techniques showed good correlation, with a slope of 0.87 and an intercept at 1.27% +/- 0.15%. Both the total and within-run coefficients of variation were consistently lower for the HPLC method compared with the immunoassay method. The HPLC method produces a chromatogram that shows the different hemoglobin fractions, allowing identification of abnormal hemoglobin variants. In heterozygous individuals, HbA1c measurements are made with no interference from the hemoglobin variant. In the case of homozygous or doubly heterozygous hemoglobin variants, the Tosoh HPLC identifies the hemoglobin variants as such and correctly does not report a HbA1c value in the presence of a markedly decreased amount of hemoglobin A. CONCLUSIONS: The Tosoh HPLC provides adequate throughput and improved precision, and the method is traceable to the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5858/1999-123-0763-eoafah

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Khuu, H. M., Robinson, C. A., Goolsby, K., Hardy, R. W., & Konrad, R. J.
Affiliations
University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
Venue
Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
Published
1999-09
Volume
123
Issue
9
Pages
763-767
ISSN
  • 0003-9985 (ISSN-L)
  • 1543-2165
OpenAlex
W2235309905
Cited by
55
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Hemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Keywords
HbA1c, immunoassay comparison, glycated hemoglobin measurement, hemoglobin variants, assay precision and accuracy
MeSH terms
Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid, Diabetes Mellitus, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Glycated Hemoglobin, Hemoglobins, Abnormal, Humans, Immunoassay, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results

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