Comparison of fingerstick hemoglobin A1c levels assayed by DCA 2000 with the DCCT/EDIC central laboratory assay: results of a Diabetes Research in Children Network (DirecNet) Study
- 1 March 2005
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Hindawi Limited in Pediatric Diabetes
- Vol. 6 (1) , 13-16
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-543x.2005.00088.x
Abstract
Background: The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method for measuring hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) serves as a reference standard against which other assays are compared. The DCA 2000 (R) + Analyzer (Bayer Inc., Tarrytown, NY, USA), which uses an immunoassay, is a very popular device for measuring HbA1c levels in pediatric diabetes practices. Objective: To determine how HbA1c values measured with the DCA 2000 in a multisite, pediatric diabetes clinic setting compare with corresponding HbA1c values measured in the DCCT/EDIC laboratory. Design/Methods: To examine this question, the Diabetes Research in Children Network (DirecNet) used the DCA 2000 in five clinical centers to measure baseline HbA1c levels in 200 youth with type I diabetes mellitus (T1DM) (aged 12.5 +/- 2.8 yr) who were participating in an outpatient clinical trial. At the same visit, an additional blood sample was obtained, refrigerated, and shipped to the DCCT/EDIC central laboratory for determination of HbA1c values. Results: The central laboratory HbA1c value averaged 8.0 +/- 0.9% (mean +/- SD), with a median (25th and 75th quartiles) of 7.8% (7.3 and 8.5%, respectively). The DCA 2000 HbA1c values were strongly correlated (r = 0.94, p < 0.001), but significantly higher than DCCT/EDIC central laboratory values with a mean difference of +0.2% (95% confidence interval +0.14 to 0.23%, p < 0.001). There was some variation in the differences between DCA 2000 and central laboratory values at the five clinical centers (p < 0.001) with mean differences ranging between 0.0 and 0.3%, but differences between the two methods did not vary significantly by age or gender. Conclusion: Measurements of HbA1c by the DCA 2000 compare favorably with the DCCT/EDIC central laboratory method, albeit with slightly higher values.Keywords
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- Rapid A1c Availability Improves Clinical Decision-Making in an Urban Primary Care ClinicDiabetes Care, 2003
- Glycated Hemoglobin Standardization – National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP) Perspectivecclm, 2003
- Evaluation of diagnostic reliability of DCA 2000 for rapid and simple monitoring of HbA1cActa Diabetologica, 2000
- Immediate feedback of HbA1c levels improves glycemic control in type 1 and insulin-treated type 2 diabetic patients.Diabetes Care, 1999
- Diabetes in urban African-Americans. XVII. Availability of rapid HbA1c measurements enhances clinical decision-making.Diabetes Care, 1999
- Comparison of hemoglobin A1C results by two different methods on patients with structural hemoglobin variantsClinical Biochemistry, 1998
- The Absence of a Glycemic Threshold for the Development of Long-Term Complications: The Perspective of the Diabetes Control and Complications TrialDiabetes, 1996
- Reviewing the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial: One member of the "control panel" speaksThe Journal of Pediatrics, 1994
- The Effect of Intensive Treatment of Diabetes on the Development and Progression of Long-Term Complications in Insulin-Dependent Diabetes MellitusNew England Journal of Medicine, 1993
- Feasibility of centralized measurements of glycated hemoglobin in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial: a multicenter study. The DCCT Research Group.Clinical Chemistry, 1987