Search

We present data on a filter-paper collection and assay method for measurement of glycated hemoglobin (gHb). Onto filter paper dipped into a solution of glucose oxidase (EC 1.1.3.4) and allowed to dry, approximately 20 microL of capillary blood was spotted. For analysis, we eluted the dried blood spot from the paper by soaking in water for 1 h, then measured the gHb in the eluate by affinity chromatography. Because the gHb significantly increased from day 1 to day 14 of storage, it was necessary to standardize the day of elution from the paper. We found a high correlation between gHb measured from samples stored for 14 days on treated paper and gHb measured by affinity chromatography from frozen whole blood or hemolysates (r = 0.96). This method is convenient, requiring small amounts of blood and little sample handling and assay time, and may be particularly useful in certain situations such as large-scale screening for diabetes.

We present data on a filter-paper collection and assay method for measurement of glycated hemoglobin (gHb). Onto filter paper dipped into a solution of glucose oxidase (EC 1.1.3.4) and allowed to dry, approximately 20 microL of capillary blood was spotted. For analysis, we eluted the dried blood spot from the paper by soaking in water for 1 h, then measured the gHb in the eluate by affinity chromatography. Because the gHb significantly increased from day 1 to day 14 of storage, it was necessary to standardize the day of elution from the paper. We found a high correlation between gHb measured from samples stored for 14 days on treated paper and gHb measured by affinity chromatography from frozen whole blood or hemolysates (r = 0.96). This method is convenient, requiring small amounts of blood and little sample handling and assay time, and may be particularly useful in certain situations such as large-scale screening for diabetes.

As the clinical utility of glycated hemoglobin (gHb) measurement increases, so does the need for standardization of values between different methods and different laboratories. Using three different methods, we examined the feasibility of interlaboratory standardization of gHb measurement. A liquid-chromatographic (HPLC) system from our research laboratory was designated the reference method. For gHb standards we used erythrocyte hemolysates prepared from blood samples from nondiabetic and diabetic subjects. Values assigned to each standard were based on the mean of multiple gHb determinations by the HPLC method. A clinical laboratory routinely prepared hemolysates and assayed gHb by commercially available ion-exchange ("mini column") and affinity chromatographic methods. For each assay a standard curve was constructed and gHb values were derived from these curves. Samples analyzed in the clinical laboratory were also analyzed in the research laboratory and the curve-derived values were compared with the HPLC-measured values, to determine the accuracy of our interlaboratory standardization procedure. Correlations were excellent (r = 0.99). The lack of significant differences between calculated and HPLC-measured values indicates that interlaboratory standardization is feasible.

As the clinical utility of glycated hemoglobin (gHb) measurement increases, so does the need for standardization of values between different methods and different laboratories. Using three different methods, we examined the feasibility of interlaboratory standardization of gHb measurement. A liquid-chromatographic (HPLC) system from our research laboratory was designated the reference method. For gHb standards we used erythrocyte hemolysates prepared from blood samples from nondiabetic and diabetic subjects. Values assigned to each standard were based on the mean of multiple gHb determinations by the HPLC method. A clinical laboratory routinely prepared hemolysates and assayed gHb by commercially available ion-exchange ("mini column") and affinity chromatographic methods. For each assay a standard curve was constructed and gHb values were derived from these curves. Samples analyzed in the clinical laboratory were also analyzed in the research laboratory and the curve-derived values were compared with the HPLC-measured values, to determine the accuracy of our interlaboratory standardization procedure. Correlations were excellent (r = 0.99). The lack of significant differences between calculated and HPLC-measured values indicates that interlaboratory standardization is feasible.