Evaluation of effects from hemoglobin variants on HbA_1c measurements by different methods

Objectives: The impact of seven hemoglobin variants (Hb Q-Thailand, Hb G-Honolulu, Hb Ube-2, Hb New York, Hb J-Bangkok, Hb G-Coushatta, and Hb E) on the outcome of HbA(1c )was investigated for six methods by comparing with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) reference method. Methods: Twenty-nine normal and 112 variant samples were measured by LC/MS/MS, Sebia Capillarys 3 TERA, Intelligene Biosystems QuanTOF, Premier Hb9210, Arkray HA-8190V, Bio-Rad D-100, and Tosoh G11, then evaluated for correlation, consistency, and mean relative bias among six methods. The lowest biological variation bias of +/- 2.8 % was an acceptable standard. Results: All methods showed poor correlation and consistency with LC/MS/MS for Hb E. The unacceptable biases were observed for Capillarys 3 TERA (-14.4 to -3.7 % for Hb Q-Thailand, Hb Ube-2, Hb New York, Hb J-Bangkok and Hb E), QuanTOF (-8.3 to -2.9 % for Hb Ube-2, Hb New York and Hb G-Coushatta), Premier Hb9210 (-18.3 to -3.6 % for Hb Q-Thailand, Hb Ube-2, Hb New York, Hb J-Bangkok and Hb E), HA-8190V variant mode (-17.3 to 6.6 % for Hb G-Honolulu, Hb Ube-2, Hb New York, Hb G-Coushatta and Hb E). All variant samples showed larger biases than +/- 2.8 % comparing HA-8190V fast mode, D-100, and G11 with LC/MS/MS. Conclusions: The accuracy of different HbA(1c) methods was influenced by some Hb variants, especially Hb Ube-2 and Hb New York. Thus, laboratories need to choose appropriate methods to measure HbA1c with different Hb variants.