Evaluation of effects from hemoglobin variants on HbA1c measurements by different methods

Abstract

Abstract Objectives The impact of seven hemoglobin variants (Hb Q-Thailand, Hb G-Honolulu, Hb Ube-2, Hb New York, Hb J-Bangkok, Hb G-Coushatta, and Hb E) on the outcome of HbA1c was investigated for six methods by comparing with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) reference method. Methods Twenty-nine normal and 112 variant samples were measured by LC/MS/MS, Sebia Capillarys 3 TERA, Intelligene Biosystems QuanTOF, Premier Hb9210, Arkray HA-8190V, Bio-Rad D-100, and Tosoh G11, then evaluated for correlation, consistency, and mean relative bias among six methods. The lowest biological variation bias of ±2.8 % was an acceptable standard. Results All methods showed poor correlation and consistency with LC/MS/MS for Hb E. The unacceptable biases were observed for Capillarys 3 TERA (−14.4 to −3.7 % for Hb Q-Thailand, Hb Ube-2, Hb New York, Hb J-Bangkok and Hb E), QuanTOF (−8.3 to −2.9 % for Hb Ube-2, Hb New York and Hb G-Coushatta), Premier Hb9210 (−18.3 to −3.6 % for Hb Q-Thailand, Hb Ube-2, Hb New York, Hb J-Bangkok and Hb E), HA-8190V variant mode (−17.3 to 6.6 % for Hb G-Honolulu, Hb Ube-2, Hb New York, Hb G-Coushatta and Hb E). All variant samples showed larger biases than ±2.8 % comparing HA-8190V fast mode, D-100, and G11 with LC/MS/MS. Conclusions The accuracy of different HbA1c methods was influenced by some Hb variants, especially Hb Ube-2 and Hb New York. Thus, laboratories need to choose appropriate methods to measure HbA1c with different Hb variants.