Analytical evaluation of a new capillary electrophoresis method for carbohydrate-deficient transferrin measurement

BackgroundCarbohydrate-deficient transferrin (CDT), the sum of a- and disialotransferrin, is considered the most efficient routine biological marker of alcohol abuse. In recent years, methods based on capillary zone electrophoresis (CZE) have been developed using specialized monocapillary systems. These are characterized by a high analytical detection level, counterbalanced by a poor productivity. We evaluated a new CZE method for CDT measurement on the Sebia Capillarys®, an eight-capillary system developed for routine serum capillary electrophoresis.MethodsPrecision and possible biases due to abnormal (low or high) transferrin levels or lipemic samples were assessed. Exactitude and precision were tested by comparison with a HPLC procedure acknowledged to be the most reliable to date. The validity of the manufacturer's cut-off was checked by measuring CDT in a population comprising abstaining patients, moderate alcohol consumers and alcohol abusers. Lastly, the method was compared to the routine %CDT TIA and N Latex CDT methods.ResultsThe imprecision was 18.5% at the minimum detection level and decreased to 6.1% for high CDT values. No significant shift in the CDT results was observed in relation to abnormally low or high serum transferrin, or in lipemic samples. A high level of concordance was observed with the HPLC method used as reference. The results were strongly correlated with both other routine methods (r > 0.90). The diagnostic values were comparable to the literature data, even if differences in the studied populations make difficult a direct comparison of the results. Our data suggested that the cut-off could be raised from 1.3% to 1.4% to reduce the number of false positive values without loss of diagnostic efficiency.ConclusionsThis Capillarys® method from Sebia showed good precision as compared to those published using other CZE methods. Capillarys® method correlated well with HPLC and two routine methods. However, we noticed significant bias at low CDT concentrations. Therefore, with the advantage of high throughput and full automation, these results indicate that the new method is a consistent alternative to the other methods proposed for routine CDT measurement.