Abbott and Roche assays exhibited a good comparability in the range of HE4 values around the previously recommended 140 pmol/L cut-off. For patient monitoring, however, the assay used for determining serial HE4 must not be changed as results from different systems in lower and higher concentration ranges can markedly differ.

No abstract

Background Growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15) is an emerging cardiovascular biomarker, and a fully automated immunoassay has recently become available. The objectives of the study were to identify biological and lifestyle factors affecting serum GDF-15 concentrations and derive robust reference intervals, and to estimate GDF-15 within-subject biological variation and derived indices. Methods A presumably healthy population of 533 questionnaire-screened adults was used to identify the biological and lifestyle determinants of serum GDF-15. Following stringent exclusion criteria, a final group of 173 individuals was selected to establish GDF-15 reference interval. Twenty-six healthy volunteers were enrolled in the biological variation substudy. Results Using a multiple regression model, age, B-type natriuretic peptide and C-reactive protein as well as smoking status were significantly related to serum GDF-15 concentrations. The upper reference limit (URL) for serum GDF-15 concentrations (90% confidence interval [CI]) was 866 ng/L (733–999 ng/L), with no sex-related difference. Although GDF-15 tended to increase with age, the weak dependence of marker from age does not justify age-related URL. The within-subject CV was 6.3% (95% CI, 4.5%–8.5%), with no sex difference in intraindividual variances. The reference change value (RCV) for GDF-15 was 23%, and two are the specimens required to ensure that the mean GDF-15 result is within ±10% of the individual’s homeostatic set point. Conclusions By identifying the main factors influencing serum GDF-15 concentrations, we robustly established the URL to be applied in adult population. As intraindividual variation of GDF-15 is relatively low, monitoring longitudinal changes in its concentrations over time using RCV can be a good alternative for interpreting GDF-15 in clinical setting.

No abstract

No abstract