Assays for Prolactin: Guidelines for the Provision of a Clinical Biochemistry Service

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
This paper summarises the views of the authors on the provision of a prolactin assay service. We discuss the pathophysiology of prolactin secretion and the clinical indications that arise from that. We cover the rather complex issue of the definition of normal and elevated prolactin levels. From these considerations, certain guidelines on the analytical performance of prolactin assays and their provision in a clinical biochemistry service are given. The extent to which currently available methods and performance as revealed by the UK External Quality Assessment Scheme (EQAS) match these guidelines are described and certain conclusions are reached. Finally, probable future developments are briefly discussed. The main conclusions and recommendations are as follows: Reagents of appropriate quality are available to enable prolactin immunoassays to be provided in UK clinical biochemistry laboratories. These are provided either separately or in the form of kits from both commercial and NHS sources. There is no requirement for individual laboratories to undertake their own antiserum production or prolactin iodination. Acceptable performance (as defined using internal QC procedures and the UK EQAS) is achievable using these reagents/kits, although one commercial kit shows a consistent marked negative bias. Reference ranges, including ‘normal ranges’, show considerable between-centre variability. Many centres have not established their own ranges, even those using in-house methods. Reference ranges for use in clinical biochemistry laboratories are proposed in this report. Some general guidance on the provision of a prolactin service is given, although this does not differ in principle from that appropriate for other peptide hormone analytes. There is no evidence that centres with small workloads perform any worse than average, although it may be more cost-efficient for such centres to send the samples elsewhere. As with other peptide analytes, non-isotopic immunometric methodology is likely to replace current radioimmunoassay methods in the near future.

This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit: