Published in

De Gruyter, Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 8(59), p. 1384-1391, 2021

DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2020-1881

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Comparison of different algorithms in laboratory diagnosis of alpha1-antitrypsin deficiency

Distributing this paper is prohibited by the publisher
Distributing this paper is prohibited by the publisher

Full text: Unavailable

Red circle
Preprint: archiving forbidden
Red circle
Postprint: archiving forbidden
Orange circle
Published version: archiving restricted
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Objectives Alpha1-antitrypsin deficiency (AATD) is an inherited condition that predisposes individuals to an increased risk of developing lung and liver disease. Even though AATD is one of the most widespread inherited diseases in Caucasian populations, only a minority of affected individuals has been detected. Whereas methods have been validated for AATD testing, there is no universally-established algorithm for the detection and diagnosis of the disorder. In order to compare different methods for diagnosing AATD, we carried out a systematic review of the literature on AATD diagnostic algorithms. Methods Complete biochemical and molecular analyses of 5,352 samples processed in our laboratory were retrospectively studied using each of the selected algorithms. Results When applying the diagnostic algorithms to the same samples, the frequency of False Negatives varied from 1.94 to 12.9%, the frequency of True Negatives was 62.91% for each algorithm and the frequency of True Positives ranged from 24.19 to 35.15%. We, therefore, highlighted some differences among Negative Predictive Values, ranging from 0.83 to 0.97. Accordingly, the sensitivity of each algorithm ranged between 0.61 and 0.95. We also postulated 1.108 g/L as optimal AAT cut-off value, in absence of inflammatory status, which points to the possible presence of genetic AATD. Conclusions The choice of the diagnostic algorithm has a significant impact on the correct diagnosis of AATD, which is essential for appropriate treatment and medical care. The fairly large number of possible false negative diagnoses revealed by the present paper should also warn clinicians of negative results in patients with clinically-suspected AATD.