Validation shows high correlation of an ACE assay in serum samples, indicating strong analytical performance for ACE-related conditions.
Background Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) is a zinc-dependent carboxypeptidase that plays a central role in the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. It is primarily expressed in pulmonary capillaries and renal epithelial cells, with two catalytic domains (C-terminal and N-terminal) involved in blood pressure regulation. Serum ACE measurement is crucial for diagnosing and monitoring ACE-related conditions, including sarcoidosis and other granulomatous diseases. This study aimed to validate an open-channel assay for serum ACE on the cobas® c 503 analyzer in accordance with Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) recommendations. Methods The analytical performance of an ACE open-channel assay (BÜHLMANN Laboratories AG) on the cobas® c 503 analyzer was evaluated. Assay parameters were established based on Roche recommendations for adapting cobas® c 502 – where ACE was previously being tested on – open channel parameters to the c503 analyzer.Validation included precision, correlation, linearity, and interference from hemolysis, icterus, and lipemia (HIL), using a total allowable error of 10%. The data were visualized using Microsoft Excel and analyzed following CLSI recommendations. Results Total imprecision of the assay was <6% across both manufacturer-provided quality control materials. Correlation with patient samples (n = 40) against the c502 ACE assay was excellent (R² = 0.974) over a concentration range of 10 – 157 U/L. The assay demonstrated excellent linearity across the analytical measurement range (4 – 140 U/L). Finally, the ACE assay exhibited tolerance to hemolysis, icterus, and lipemia up to Roche cobas serum indices thresholds of 50, 5, and 100, respectively. Conclusion Using a conversion system to transfer assay parameters from the cobas® c502 to the c503 analyzer, we established an ACE assay that exhibited excellent analytical performance in terms of precision, method comparison, linearity, and tolerance to HIL interferences.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hooshmandi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: