Distribution of serum amyloid A and establishment of reference intervals in healthy adults

Abstract

Background: Serum amyloid A (SAA) plays a critical role in acute or chronic and is used in clinical laboratories as an indicator of inflammation. The elevated SAA is closely related to inflammation-mediated diseases, such as liver diseases, autoimmune diseases, metabolism-related diseases, amyloidosis, and tumors. However, there is no unified population reference interval for SAA. This study aimed to investigate the distribution of SAA in healthy Chinese adults 20-79 years of age and to establish its population reference interval.Methods: A total of 2365 healthy subjects met the requirements of this study. The levels of SAA were detected using an AU5821 automatic biochemical analyzer and its original reagents. According to the recommended methods of CLSI C28-A3 and WS/T 402-2012, the population reference interval of SAA was established using the unilateral 95th percentile (P 95 ), and the 90% confidence interval of upper limits was calculated. Results:The distributions of SAA levels were not significantly different between sexes (P> .05) and also did not differ by age (P> .05). Therefore, the population reference interval for SAA was established as an upper limit of 11.0 mg/L (90% confidence interval: 9.3-12.3 mg/L) by using the method of latex immunoturbidimetry. Conclusions:Serum amyloid A is closely related to the occurrence and progression of various diseases. The preliminary establishment of a population reference interval for SAA can fully exert its potential clinical value. K E Y W O R D Sacute-phase reactive protein, reference interval, serum amyloid A

Composite Bacterial Infection Index and Serum Amyloid A Protein in Pulmonary Tuberculosis Patients and their Household Contacts in Makassar

“…However, there was a significant difference between SAA values in males and females, and between ages 15 and 39 and ≥ 40 years, suggesting that age and separate gender reference range may be used in future analysis. Contradict to the result of this study, Liu et al reported that the SAA levels were not notably different between gender and age [30]. This difference may have occurred because Liu only examined healthy populations.…”

The potential role of serum amyloid A as biomarker of rheumatic diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Furthermore, the lack of association with disease duration suggests that the differences in SAA concentrations between RD patients and controls are likely to be manifest also in the early stages of the disease, potentially facilitating diagnosis and commencement of treatment. The reported associations between effect size and sex, indicating a relatively greater difference in SAA concentrations vs. controls in studies with a greater representation of male RD patients, represents an interesting finding as previous reports have shown similar SAA concentrations between males and females in healthy subjects [ 74 , 75 ], and in patients with cancer [ 76 ]. Similarly, the significant and negative association observed between the effect size of the between-group differences in SAA concentrations and body mass index is at odds with previous reports which highlighted positive associations between SAA, body mass index, and obesity in non-RD populations [ 77 , 78 ].…”

Cross-sectional Study of Workers Employed at a Copper Smelter—Effects of Long-term Exposures to Copper on Lung Function and Chronic Inflammation

“…This was equally observed among copper-exposed and referent subjects and so may reflect a common component of smelter working conditions. All other median blood biomarker levels fell within the respective reported ranges (CRP: <0.2 to 10.5 mg/L, 46 IL-6: 1 to 13.1 pg/mL, 47 IL-8: 24.4 to 35.9 pg/mL, 42 tumor necrosis factor α: 7.91 to 12.73 pg/mL, 48 CC16: 14.4 ± 4.6 ng/mL, 49 ESel: 9.15 to 65.19 ng/mL, 44 NE: 123.5 ± 24.3 ng/mL, 50 and SAA: <11.0 μg/mL 51 ). However, there are limitations to comparing “healthy” subject value ranges between studies such as population demographics and experimental differences in the use of commercial analytical assays that hamper meaningful comparisons.…”