Back to Authors

Scott, Renee

Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

Citations 8

A-226 Validation of Calculated Glycerol Corrected Triglycerides
Scott, Renee, Meeusen, Jeffrey W. , Jaffe, Allan S. , Vasile, Vlad C. , Jaffe, Allan S. , Donato, Leslie J.

Clinical Chemistry | October 2, 2024 | Volume: 70 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/clinchem/hvae106.223 Get It

Abstract Background Patients with elevated free glycerol can have falsely elevated triglyceride concentrations known as pseudohypertriglyceridemia. Most clinical laboratory triglycerides methods measure the concentration of glycerol released following the enzymatic hydrolysis of triglycerides to quantitate triglycerides. Thus, increased free glycerol can lead to falsely increased triglyceride concentration. Identifying and measuring the interference is necessary to effectively manage patient care interventions. A glycerol-corrected triglyceride assay was discontinued from Roche Diagnostics in 2021. We created a process to determine glycerol-corrected triglycerides by measuring glycerol directly using an assay from Randox Laboratories. Methods Glycerol (Randox Laboratories) and nonglycerol-blanked triglycerides (Roche Diagnostics) were measured in serum using the Roche Cobas c501. Stability (n=10) and expected values (n=206) were determined using serum from healthy volunteers. Linearity (n=5) and precision (5 replicates on 2 runs over 5 days) were determined using residual clinical serum spiked with exogenous glycerol as necessary to span the analytical measuring range. Glycerol corrected triglyceride concentrations were calculated by subtracting glycerol (mmol/L) from triglyceride (mmol/L) and converting to mg/dL (x88.59). Samples previously measured using the Triglyceride/Glycerol Blanked Reagent (n=53, Roche Diagnostics) were used to assess accuracy. (Figure 1) Results Glycerol measures were stable 3 days refrigerated and 30 days frozen. Precision coefficient of variation was 1.0% within run and 7.1% within lab. Expected values were 10 - 109 mcmol/L, and the method was linear between 2 - 3,971 mcmol/L. The average bias between methods was 11.0% with slope of 1.02 and R2>0.97 (Figure 1). Conclusions Glycerol can be accurately measured using the Randox method and the result can be used to generate an accurate glycerol-corrected triglyceride concentration.
B-044 Analytical validation of an serum glycerol measured by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy NMR
Wang, Qin , Scott, Renee, Meeusen, J, Donato, Leslie J.

Clinical Chemistry | September 27, 2023 | Volume: 69 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/clinchem/hvad097.387 Get It

Abstract Background Glycerol kinase deficiency (GKD) is a rare X-linked recessive disorder biochemically characterized by hyperglycerolaemia. Adults with GKD are usually asymptomatic. However, they often present with pseudohypertriglyceridemia because most clinical triglyceride methods measure enzymatically generated glycerol from triglycerides. Currently, assays for measuring plasma glycerol are lacking. We describe a preliminary validation of glycerol measured by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR). Methods Serum glycerol was measured by NMR (Numares AG, Regensberg, Germany) using a Ascend 600 NMR (Bruker, Billerica, MA). Stability and matrix effects were determined by repeat measurement of 10 freshly collected samples following various storage conditions. Normal donors were recruited for reference interval (n = 143). Analytical specificity was assessed by spiking red cell lysate, bilirubin and intralipid. Precision was assessed by measuring three pools five times for five days. Accuracy was performed by spiking known concentrations of glycerol. Accuracy was assessed using an enzymatic method (Randox Laboratories, Ltd. County Antrim, UK) on a Roche Cobas c501 (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN) as reference. Results Measured glycerol increased over time in both serum and plasma, however, prepared samples were stable on the instrument for up to 24 hours. Measured glycerol was not impacted by hemoglobin (1000 mg/dL) or bilirubin (625 mg/dL), however, spiking Intralipid® prevented any measurement. NMR and enzymatic assays strongly correlated, with a constant bias (Table 1). Repeatability and reproducibility were <10% CV and % recovery from glycerol standard were >80% for all concentrations. Conclusion Pre-analytical stability, imprecision and accuracy were acceptable for clinical measurement of glycerol using NMR. While there is a significant systematic bias with enzymatic methods, further studies in normal and disease populations will be necessary to determine clinical impact.
Performance of Nuclear Magnetic Resonance-Based Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate in a Real-World Setting
Santamaría, Amauri Schwäble , Grassi, M , Meeusen, Jeffrey W. , Lieske, John C. , Scott, Renee, Robertson, Andrew, Schiffer, Eric, Schwäble Santamaria, Amauri , Grassi, Marcello , Lieske, John C

Bioengineering | June 14, 2023 | Volume: 10 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 717

10.3390/bioengineering10060717 Get It

An accurate estimate of glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) is essential for proper clinical management, especially in patients with kidney dysfunction. This prospective observational study evaluated the real-world performance of the nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)-based GFRNMR equation, which combines creatinine, cystatin C, valine, and myo-inositol with age and sex. We compared GFRNMR performance to that of the 2021 CKD-EPI creatinine and creatinine-cystatin C equations (CKD-EPI2021Cr and CKD-EPI2021CrCys), using 115 fresh routine samples of patients scheduled for urinary iothalamate clearance measurement (mGFR). Median bias to mGFR of the three eGFR equations was comparably low, ranging from 0.4 to 2.0 mL/min/1.73 m2. GFRNMR outperformed the 2021 CKD-EPI equations in terms of precision (interquartile range to mGFR of 10.5 vs. 17.9 mL/min/1.73 m2 for GFRNMR vs. CKD-EPI2021CrCys; p = 0.01) and accuracy (P15, P20, and P30 of 66.1% vs. 48.7% [p = 0.007], 80.0% vs. 60.0% [p < 0.001] and 95.7% vs. 86.1% [p = 0.006], respectively, for GFRNMR vs. CKD-EPI2021CrCys). Clinical parameters such as etiology, comorbidities, or medications did not significantly alter the performance of the three eGFR equations. Altogether, this study confirmed the utility of GFRNMR for accurate GFR estimation, and its potential value in routine clinical practice for improved medical care.
Short- and Long-Term Biological Variability of Small Dense LDL, HDL3, and Triglyceride-Rich Lipoprotein Cholesterol
Fatica, Erica M. , Jenkins, Sarah M. , Scott, Renee, Block, Darci R , Meeusen, Jeffrey W. , Baumann, N, Saenger, Amy K., Scott, Renee’ J, Baumann, Nikola A, Donato, Leslie J.

The Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine | May 11, 2022 | Volume: 7 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 1047-1061

10.1093/jalm/jfac039 Get It

Abstract Background Measurement of cholesterol within lipoprotein subfractions may aid in cardiovascular disease prediction. Simple, homogenous enzymatic assays for the direct measurement of lipoprotein subfractions have been developed to measure small dense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (sdLDL-C), high-density lipoprotein-3 cholesterol (HDL3-C), and triglyceride-rich lipoprotein (TRL-C) cholesterol. The objective of this study was to determine biological variability for sdLDL-C, HDL3-C, and TRL-C in a healthy reference population to facilitate interpretation of these analytes. Methods Serum samples were collected from 24 healthy subjects (n = 14 female/10 male) daily for 3 days while non-fasting, and daily for 5 days, weekly for 4 weeks, and monthly for 6 months after overnight fasting. sdLDL-C, HDL3-C, and TRL-C cholesterol were measured by homogenous enzymatic assays. Sources of variability (between-subject, within-subject, and analytical) were calculated using random-effects regression models. Reference change value (RCV) and index of individuality (II) for each time period were determined from the variance components. Results Analytic variability (daily, weekly, and monthly CVA) was &lt;3% for each analyte. Monthly within-subject variability (CVI) was 17.1% for sdLDL-C, 7.4% for HDL3-C, and 25.7% for TRL-C. Most of the monthly variation was attributed to between-subject variation for all 3 analytes. Overall RCVs for monthly measurements were 18.1 mg/dL for sdLDL-C, 6.1 mg/dL for HDL3-C, and 16.0 mg/dL for TRL-C. IIs were &lt;0.6 for sdLDL-C and HDL3-C, and 0.81 for TRL-C. Conclusions sdLDL-C, HDL3-C, and TRL-C showed moderate within-subject variability, but high between-subject variability, in a healthy reference population. Given the high individuality of each analyte, population-based reference intervals may be inadequate to detect clinically significant changes.
Analytical Validation of GFRNMR: A Blood-Based Multiple Biomarker Assay for Accurate Estimation of Glomerular Filtration Rate
Fuhrmann, Markus, Santamaría, Amauri Schwäble , Scott, Renee, Meeusen, Jeffrey W. , Fernandes, Marianna, Venz, John, Rothe, Victoria, Stämmler, Frank , Ehrich, J. H. H. , Schiffer, Eric, Schwäble Santamaria, Amauri , Venz, John

Diagnostics | April 30, 2022 | Volume: 12 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 1120

10.3390/diagnostics12051120 Get It

Accurate and precise monitoring of kidney function is critical for a timely and reliable diagnosis of chronic kidney disease (CKD). The determination of kidney function usually involves the estimation of the glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). We recently reported the clinical performance of a new eGFR equation (GFRNMR) based on the nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) measurement of serum myo-inositol, valine, and creatinine, in addition to the immunoturbidometric quantification of serum cystatin C, age and sex. We now describe the analytical performance evaluation of GFRNMR according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. Within-laboratory coefficients of variation (CV%) of the GFRNMR equation did not exceed 4.3%, with a maximum CV% for repeatability of 3.7%. Between-site reproducibility (three sites) demonstrated a maximum CV% of 5.9%. GFRNMR stability was demonstrated for sera stored for up to 8 days at 2–10°C and for NMR samples stored for up to 10 days in the NMR device at 6 ± 2°C. Substance interference was limited to 4/40 (10.0%) of the investigated substances, resulting in an underestimated GFRNMR (for glucose and metformin) or a loss of results (for naproxen and ribavirin) for concentrations twice as high as usual clinical doses. The analytical performances of GFRNMR, combined with its previously reported clinical performance, support the potential integration of this NMR method into clinical practice.
Biological Variability of Small Dense LDL, HDL3, and Triglyceride-Rich Lipoprotein Cholesterol
Fatica, Erica M. , Jenkins, Sarah Howard, Scott, Renee, Block, Darci R , Meeusen, Jeffrey W. , Baumann, N, Saenger, Amy K., Donato, Leslie J.

American Journal of Clinical Pathology | October 31, 2021 | Volume: 156 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: S4-S4

10.1093/ajcp/aqab189.006 Get It

Abstract The guideline-recommended lipid panel for cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment measures total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, triglycerides, and calculated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. Measured cholesterol in subfractions of HDL and LDL purportedly improve CVD risk prediction. Homogenous enzymatic methods are now available for measurement of the cholesterol within small dense LDL (sLDL), small dense HDL (HDL3), and triglyceride-rich lipoproteins (TRL). For meaningful interpretation of these measurements, an understanding of the potential sources and extent of result variability is needed. The smallest difference between serial measurements within a patient that likely reflects a change in clinical status is called the reference change value (RCV). Biological variability and reference change values (RCV) are well-characterized for basic lipids but there is limited information for sLDL, HDL3 or TRL. The objective of this study was to determine intra- and inter-individual variability for sLDL, HDL3, and TRL in a healthy reference population. Serum samples were collected from 24 healthy subjects (n=14 female/10 male) daily for three days (non-fasting), daily for five days (fasting), weekly for four weeks (fasting), and monthly for 7 months (fasting). sLDL, HDL3, and TRL cholesterol were measured in duplicate by enzymatic colorimetric assays (Denka, Japan) on a Roche Cobas c501. Each source of variability (between subject, within subject, and analytical) was calculated using random-effects regression models to estimate each variance component including the overall variation, standard deviation (SD), coefficient of variation (CV), and proportion of total variance (between-subject, within-subject, and analytical). Using these analytical and biological variances, the reference change value (RCV), index of individuality (IoI), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were determined. Analytic variability (CVa) from monthly testing was 1.2%, 1.1%, and 1.5% for sLDL, HDL3, and TRL, respectively. Monthly within-subject variability (CVw) was 17.1% for sLDL, 7.4% for HDL3 and 25.7% for TRL. Monthly between-subject variability (CVb) was 32.2%, 13.93%, and 33.4% for sLDL, HDL3, and TRL, respectively. Most of the monthly variation was attributed to between-subject variation for all three tests. Within-subject variation accounted for 37% of TRL variation and 22% for both sLDL and HLD3. Within-subject RCVs for monthly measurements were 16.9mg/dL for sLDL, 5.3mg/dL for HDL3, and 15.1mg/dL for TRL. IoIs for monthly testing were 0.81 for TRL, 0.57 for sLDL, and 0.61 for HDL3. Our data demonstrate that sLDL, HDL3, and TRL show low analytical variability, moderate within-subject variability, but high between-subject variability when measured by homogenous assays in a healthy population. The IoI value (&gt;0.6) for TRL suggests use of a reference interval is appropriate for result interpretation. Conversely, clinical cut-points may be more useful than reference intervals for sLDL and HDL3 which had IoIs ~0.6. These findings may be useful for clinical interpretation, particularly when comparing successive measurements of these analytes.
Aspirin Responsiveness in Healthy Volunteers Measured with Multiple Assay Platforms
Karon, Brad S. , Wockenfus, Amy M., Scott, Renee, Hartman, Stacy, McConnell, Joseph P., Santrach, Paula J., Jaffe, Allan S. , Jaffe, Allan S.

Clinical Chemistry | April 17, 2008 | Volume: 54 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 1060-1065

10.1373/clinchem.2007.101014 Get It

Abstract Background: We evaluated the sensitivity, precision, and concordance of 4 assays designed to detect aspirin responsiveness or resistance. Methods: Twenty-nine healthy laboratory volunteers took 80 mg aspirin for 7 days, and a subset of volunteers took 325 mg aspirin for an additional 7 days. We measured platelet function by light transmission aggregometry with arachidonic acid, PFA-100, and VerifyNow. PFA-100 and VerifyNow assays were performed in duplicate to assess method imprecision. Some volunteers had samples taken within 2–4 h of the final dose of aspirin and again within 20–24 h of the final dose. We measured urinary 11-dehydro-thromboxane B2 at baseline and after 80 or 325 mg aspirin. Results: No volunteers were nonresponsive to aspirin therapy as measured by the PFA-100. One of 29 participants demonstrated lack of response to aspirin as measured by VerifyNow and urinary 11-dehydro-thromboxane B2; 2 of 29 demonstrated lack of response as measured by light transmission aggregometry. Imprecision was &lt;10% for the PFA-100 and VerifyNow. Concordance was high (&gt;90%) between all assays. Neither aspirin dose (80 vs 325 mg) nor timing between final dose of aspirin and blood draw (2–4 vs 20–24 h) affected any of the assays. Conclusions: Light transmission aggregometry, PFA-100, VerifyNow, and urinary 11-dehydro-thromboxane B2 are all sensitive to the effects of aspirin in healthy individuals. Variables such as aspirin dose, timing between final dose of aspirin and blood collection, and imprecision do not affect the ability of the assays to detect aspirin effect on platelet function.
Evaluation of the Impact of Hematocrit and Other Interference on the Accuracy of Hospital-Based Glucose Meters
Karon, Brad S. , Griesmann, Laurie D, Scott, Renee, Bryant, Sandra C. , DuBois, Jeffrey A., Shirey, Terry, Presti, Steven, Santrach, Paula J.

Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics | February 8, 2008 | Volume: 10 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 111-120

10.1089/dia.2007.0257 Get It