Changes in lipoprotein(a) levels measured by six kit methods during growth hormone treatment of growth hormone-deficient adults

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease, has previously been reported to increase, decrease or show no change in growth hormone (GH)-deficient individuals receiving GH replacement. To assess whether these inconsistencies could be attributed to differences in imm...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Growth hormone & IGF research 2000-02, Vol.10 (1), p.14-19
Hauptverfasser: Wieringa, G., Toogood, A.A., Ryder, W.D.J., Anderson, J.M., Mackness, M., Shalet, S.M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease, has previously been reported to increase, decrease or show no change in growth hormone (GH)-deficient individuals receiving GH replacement. To assess whether these inconsistencies could be attributed to differences in immunoassay methods, Lp(a) was measured by six commercial kits at 0, 3, 6 and 9 months in nine GH-deficient individuals (median age 68.3 years, six male) during 9 months GH therapy. There was a significant rise in Lp(a) with the INCStar immunoturbidimetric (IT) method and the Mercodia enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (P≤0.05, two-tailed Wilcoxon signed rank test), a non-significant rise with the Pharmacia immuno-radiometric assay and the Biopool ELISA methods (P =0.06), and no change with the Immuno ELISA and WAKO IT kits. There was also considerable variation in the values reported within each individual. These results suggest that the previously reported inconsistencies may in part be due to methodological differences, and that the effect of GH on Lp(a) remains unknown. This study highlights the need for a more common approach to the standardization of Lp(a) methods and the selection of antibodies used in them. Better performing methods may allow a more reliable interpretation of the effects of GH on Lp(a)
ISSN:1096-6374
1532-2238
DOI:10.1054/ghir.2000.0134