Open AccessCorrelation between Serum Levels of 3,3ʹ,5ʹ-Triiodothyronine and Thyroid Hormones Measured by Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry and Immunoassay
Author(s) -
Hiroyuki Sakai,
Hidenori Nagao,
Masaru Sakurai,
Takako Okumura,
Yoshiyuki Nagai,
Junpei Shikuma,
Ryo Ito,
Tetsuya Imazu,
Takashi Miwa,
Masato Odawara
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0138864
Subject(s) - chromatography , triiodothyronine , reverse triiodothyronine , radioimmunoassay , immunoassay , liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry , chemistry , analyte , correlation coefficient , tandem mass spectrometry , detection limit , mass spectrometry , selected reaction monitoring , ion suppression in liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry , hormone , medicine , biochemistry , immunology , mathematics , antibody , statistics
Objective For measuring serum 3,3 ′ ,5 ′ -triiodothyronine (rT3) levels, radioimmunoassay (RIA) has traditionally been used owing to the lack of other reliable methods; however, it has recently become difficult to perform. Meanwhile, liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) has recently been attracting attention as a novel alternative method in clinical chemistry. To the best of our knowledge, there are no studies to date comparing results of the quantification of human serum rT3 between LC-MS/MS and RIA. We therefore examined the feasibility of LC-MS/MS as a novel alternative method for measuring serum rT3, thyroxine (T4), and 3,5,3′-triiodothyronine (T3) levels. Methods Assay validation was performed by LC-MS/MS using quality control samples of rT3, T4, and T3 at 4 various concentrations which were prepared from reference compounds. Serum samples of 50 outpatients in our department were quantified both by LC-MS/MS and conventional immunoassay for rT3, T4, and T3. Correlation coefficients between the 2 measurement methods were statistically analyzed respectively. Results Matrix effects were not observed with our method. Intra-day and inter-day precisions were less than 10.8% and 9.6% for each analyte at each quality control level, respectively. Intra-day and inter-day accuracies were between 96.2% and 110%, and between 98.3% and 108.6%, respectively. The lower limit of quantification was 0.05 ng/mL. Strong correlations were observed between the 2 measurement methods (correlation coefficient, T4: 0.976, p < 0.001; T3: 0.912, p < 0.001; rT3: 0.928, p < 0.001). Conclusions Our LC-MS/MS system requires no manual cleanup operation, and the process after application of a sample is fully automated; furthermore, it was found to be highly sensitive, and superior in both precision and accuracy. The correlation between the 2 methods over a wide range of concentrations was strong. LC-MS/MS is therefore expected to become a useful tool for clinical diagnosis and research.