IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0253807.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparisons of plasma aldosterone and renin data between an automated chemiluminescent immunoanalyzer and conventional radioimmunoassays in the screening and diagnosis of primary aldosteronism

Author

Listed:
  • Naohisa Tamura
  • Erika Watanabe
  • Rumi Shirakawa
  • Eiji Nakatani
  • Kanako Yamada
  • Hiroshi Hatakeyama
  • Mizuki Torii-Hanakita
  • Chika Kyo
  • Rieko Kosugi
  • Tatsuo Ogawa
  • Masato Kotani
  • Takeshi Usui
  • Tatsuhide Inoue

Abstract

Determining values of plasma renin activity (PRA) or plasma active renin concentration (ARC), plasma aldosterone concentration (PAC), and aldosterone-to-renin ratio (ARR) is essential to diagnose primary aldosteronism (PA), but it takes several days with conventional radioimmunoassays (RIAs). Chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassays for PAC and ARC using the Accuraseed® immunoanalyzer facilitated the determination, but relations between Accuraseed® immunoanalyzer-based and RIA-based values in samples of PA confirmatory tests and adrenal venous sampling remained to be elucidated. We addressed this issue in the present study. This is a prospective, cross-sectional study. ARC and PAC values were measured by the Accuraseed® immunoanalyzer in samples, in which PRA and PAC values had been measured by the PRA-FR® RIA and SPAC®-S Aldosterone kits, respectively. The relations between Accuraseed® immunoanalyzer-based and RIA-based values were investigated with regression analyses. The optimal cutoff of Accuraseed® immunoanalyzer-based ARR for PA screening was determined by the receiver operating characteristic analysis. After log-log transformations, linear relations with high coefficients of determination were observed between Accuraseed® immunoanalyzer-based and RIA-based data of renin and aldosterone. Following the PA guidelines of Japan Endocrine Society, Accuraseed® immunoanalyzer-based cutoffs were calculated from the regression equations: the basal PAC for PA screening >12 ng/dL, PAC for the saline infusion test >8.2 ng/dL, ARC for the furosemide-upright test 3.09 ng/dL per pg/mL. The optimal cutoff of Accuraseed® immunoanalyzer-based ARR for PA screening was >2.43 ng/dL over pg/mL not to overlook bilateral PA patients. The present study provided conversion formulas between Accuraseed® immunoanalyzer-based and RIA-based values of renin, aldosterone, and ARR, not only in basal samples but also in samples of PA confirmatory tests and adrenal venous sampling. Although validation studies are awaited, the present study will become priming water of harmonization of renin and aldosterone immunoassays.

Suggested Citation

  • Naohisa Tamura & Erika Watanabe & Rumi Shirakawa & Eiji Nakatani & Kanako Yamada & Hiroshi Hatakeyama & Mizuki Torii-Hanakita & Chika Kyo & Rieko Kosugi & Tatsuo Ogawa & Masato Kotani & Takeshi Usui &, 2021. "Comparisons of plasma aldosterone and renin data between an automated chemiluminescent immunoanalyzer and conventional radioimmunoassays in the screening and diagnosis of primary aldosteronism," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-23, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0253807
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253807
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0253807
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0253807&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0253807?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0253807. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.