Next Article in Journal
Assessing the Predictive Accuracy of the Eaton–Littler Classification in Thumb Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis: A Comparative Analysis with the Outerbridge Classification in a Cohort of 51 Cases
Previous Article in Journal
Prognostic Implication of Ventricular Volumetry in Early Brain Computed Tomography after Cardiac Arrest
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Diagnostics
Volume 14
Issue 16
10.3390/diagnostics14161702
diagnostics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

MyACR: A Point-of-Care Medical Device for Determination of Albumin–Creatinine Ratio (uACR) in Random Urine Samples as a Marker of Nephropathy

by
Nadda Muhamad
1,
Napaporn Youngvises
2,
Tullayakorn Plengsuriyakarn
3,
Wanchai Meesiri
2,
Wanna Chaijaroenkul
3 and
Kesara Na-Bangchang
3,*
1
Department of Biomedicine and Health Informatics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Silpakorn University, Nakhon Pathom 73000, Thailand
2
Bangkok High Lab Co., Ltd., Bang Khen District, Bangkok 10220, Thailand
3
Graduate Program in Bioclinical Sciences, Chulabhorn International College of Medicine, Thammasat University, Pathum Thani 12120, Thailand
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diagnostics 2024, 14(16), 1702; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14161702
Submission received: 25 April 2024 / Revised: 1 August 2024 / Accepted: 2 August 2024 / Published: 6 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Point-of-Care Diagnostics and Devices)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a progressive condition that affects more than 10% of the world’s population. Monitoring urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) has become the gold standard for nephropathy diagnosis and control. The objective of the present study was to develop a simple, accurate, sensitive, and rapid point-of-care test (PoCT) device, MyACR, for uACR measurement, intended for use in community healthcare to screen for the risk and monitor the progress of CKD. Albumin and creatinine concentrations in urine samples were determined using spectrophotometric dye (tetrabromophenol blue)-binding and colorimetric Jaffe assay, respectively. Urine samples were diluted with distilled water (1:80) and mixed separately with albumin and creatinine reaction mixture. The creatinine reaction was incubated at room temperature (25 °C) for 30 min before analysis. Optical density (OD) was measured at the wavelengths of 625 nm (albumin) and 515 nm (creatinine). All calibration curves (0–60 mg/L and 0–2 mg/dL for albumin and creatinine) yielded linear relationships with correlation coefficients (R2) of >0.997. Good accuracy (% deviation of mean value (DMV) ≤ 5.42%) and precision (% coefficients of variation (CV) ≤ 12.69%) were observed from both the intra- and inter-day assays for the determination of albumin and creatinine using MyACR. The limit of quantification (LOQ) of albumin and creatinine in urine samples determined using MyACR and a laboratory spectrophotometer were 5 mg/L and 0.25 mg/dL, respectively, using 37.5 μL urine spiked samples (n = 5). The device was well-applied with clinical samples from 20 CKD patients. The median (range) of %DMV of the central (hospital) laboratory method (immune-based assay) was 3.48 (−17.05 to 21.64)%, with a high correlation coefficient (R2 > 0.98). In conclusion, MyACR showed satisfactory test performance in terms of accuracy, reproducibility, and sensitivity. Cost-effectiveness and improvement in clinical decision making need to be proven in future multisite community and home studies.

1. Introduction

Nephropathy has increasingly become a significant global health concern in recent years [1,2]. Diabetes and hypertension are typically the primary causes of nephropathy, which can result in kidney damage, chronic kidney disease (CKD), renal failure, and mortality [3]. CKD is defined as either kidney damage or a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) < 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2 body surface area for three months or more, irrespective of cause, and stages of CKD severity are classified based on GFR [2,4,5]. The early stages of CKD are typically asymptomatic. As the condition progresses, however, patients may develop symptoms, such as nausea, vomiting, loss of appetite, fatigue, weakness, sleep disturbances, shortness of breath, lower back pain, and swelling in the feet and ankles [5]. Severe cases of CKD can lead to significant complications, such as ischemic heart disease, stroke, peripheral vascular disease, and cancer [2,6]. Early detection of nephropathy, especially in patients with diabetes and hypertension, is thus urgently required to prevent the progression of kidney damage.
Kidney function disorders and kidney disease are commonly evaluated through 24 h urine tests, in which urine is collected over a 24 h period to provide a precise evaluation of health status [7]. Although the determinations of creatinine and albumin from 24 h urine samples are considered the gold standard and widely used laboratory tests for kidney disorders, these tests pose challenges, including inconvenience for patients and potential low adherence to instructions. To address this limitation, the assessment of the albumin-to-creatinine ratio from random urine (uACR) serves as an alternative, as it is highly correlated with 24 h urine albumin [8,9,10,11,12]. Nephropathy occurs when the uACR is >30 mg/g creatinine or microalbuminuria is present (urinary albumin 30–300 mg/24 h) [13]. Without early detection and treatment, microalbuminuria may progress to irreversible macroalbuminuria (>300 mg/24 h) [14], which increases the risk of CKD progression and cardiovascular events.
The common methods that currently used for urine albumin and creatinine determination for the uACR assessment are immunoturbidimetry [15,16] and enzymatic assay [17,18], respectively, by using automated machine. However, these methods are costly, require advanced and complex instruments, and necessitate professional expertise, thus limiting their use at community health service centers. This emphasizes the need to develop highly sensitive point-of-care testing (PoCT) devices with simple techniques for rapid albuminuria tests to facilitate early CKD detection, monitoring, and management.
Hence, the objective of the present study was to develop a simple, accurate, sensitive, and rapid PoCT device—MyACR for uACR assessment—for simultaneous determination of urine creatinine and albumin. The clinical applicability of the device was validated in comparison with the gold standard test used in the central laboratory (immune-based assay) in urine samples obtained from CKD patients. Further study is required to evaluate its potential use by community healthcare professionals in resource-limited facilities and by patients in their own homes for screening the risk and monitoring the progress of CKD.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Chemicals and Reagents

Creatinine and tetrabromophenol blue (TBPB) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA). Picric acid (PA) was obtained from Power Tech Chemical (Bangkok, Thailand). Human serum albumin (HSA) was purchased from Sisco Research Laboratories (Mumbai, India). Sodium sulfate anhydrous was purchased from QReC, New Zealand. Trisodium citrate dihydrate, ammonium chloride, magnesium sulfate heptahydrate, and disodium oxalate were obtained from Loba Chemie (Mumbai, India). Urea was purchased from Affymetrix (Cleveland, OH, USA). Potassium chloride and sodium chloride were obtained from Ajax Finechem (Wollongong, Australia). Sodium phosphate monobasic monohydrate was purchased from Carlo Erba (Emmendingen, Germany). Sodium phosphate dibasic heptahydrate and calcium chloride were purchased from Merck KGaA (Darmstadt, Germany). Sodium bicarbonate was obtained from VWR Life Science AMRESCO (Bridgeport, PA, USA).
A stock solution (20 mg/mL) of HSA and creatinine was prepared with deionized water and stored at 4 °C. The working solutions were obtained by diluting the stock solution with deionized water before use.
Artificial urine was prepared using the ingredients shown in Table 1 [19].

2.2. Instrumentation and Measurement Platform

MyACR was developed as a colorimetric-based spectroscopic PoCT device to determine uACR utilizing a dual optical sensor. The test platform of the MyACR device is shown in Figure 1, and the schematic diagram of the system’s operation is shown in Figure 2. The MCU (microcontroller unit) sends a signal to the constant current source circuit to transmit UV light at 625 nm and 515 nm to pass through the cuvette and photodiode amplifier circuit. The detector receives Vout-1 and Vout-2 signals, converts them to ADC (analog-to-digital converter), and filters out only the desired frequency signals. The noise from outside ambient light is removed and used to calculate the absorbance value according to the equation
T = I/Io
A = log10 (1/T) or A = 2 − log10 (%T)
where T = transmittance, I = transmitted light, Io = incident light, and A = absorbance.
The absorbance value at 625 nm is used to calculate the albumin concentration according to the equation
Albumin = [(A-intercept)/slope] × Dilution factor
where A is an absorbance at 625 nm and the slope and intercept are from the linear calibration.
The absorbance value at 515 nm is used to calculate the creatinine concentration according to the equation
Creatinine = [(A-intercept)/slope] × Dilution factor
where A is an absorbance at 515 nm and the slope and intercept are from the linear calibration.
The albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) is calculated according to the equation
uACR = (Albumin × 100)/Creatinine
Results are displayed and interpreted as follows: (i) normal urinary albumin if uACR < 30 mg/g creatinine, (ii) microalbuminuria if uACR = 30–300 mg/g creatinine, and (iii) macroalbuminuria if uACR > 300 mg/g creatinine [20,21].

2.3. Colorimetric Detection of Albumin and Creatinine

Albumin concentrations in urine samples (artificial and clinical samples) were determined using a spectrophotometric dye-binding assay. The dye used in the reaction was tetrabromophenol blue (TBPB) [22].
Albumin + tetrabromophenol blue in acetate buffer (pH 3.2) → ALB-TBPB Complex
Concentrations of creatinine (artificial and clinical samples) were determined using the colorimetric Jaffe reaction in alkaline conditions [23,24,25].
Creatinine + Picric Acid + NaOH → CRE-Picrate Complex
The reaction mixture of creatinine was incubated at room temperature (25 °C) for 30 min, and uACR was determined using MyACR.

2.4. MyACR Detector Linearity

UV-visible absorbance of standard solutions of albumin (7 concentrations in the range of 0–60 mg/L) and creatinine (7 concentrations in the range of 0–2 mg/dL) following the reactions described above was recorded using MyACR at the absorbances of 625 nm and 515 nm, respectively. The measured values of both albumin and creatinine at all concentrations were within acceptable limits, i.e., ≤±10% deviation from the values measured using a laboratory spectrophotometer (PERSEE T6U UV/VIS Spectrometer, Auburn, CA, USA).

2.5. Measurement of Albumin and Creatinine in Urine Samples

For albumin reaction, 2 mL of the mixture of tetrabromophenol blue (TBPB, 5 × 10−5 M) and 1% Triton X-100 in 0.05 M acetate buffer (pH 3.2) were thoroughly mixed with a diluted urine (37.5 µL) sample in 2962.5 µL of distilled water (1:80) [22]. For the creatinine reaction, the alkaline picrate reaction mixture of picric acid (1 mL) and sodium hydroxide (1 mL) was thoroughly mixed with a diluted urine sample in distilled water (1:80) and incubated at room temperature for 30 min before analysis [23]. The optical density (OD) of the mixture of the urine sample (3 mL each) for determination of albumin and creatinine concentrations was measured against respective blank solutions in sample holders No. 1 (absorbance at 625 nm) and 2 (absorbance at 515 nm), respectively. The color intensity was corrected into Δintensity (absolute value) by subtracting the blank intensity and adjusting with the dilution factor (1:80).

2.6. Validation of Test Performance of MyACR

2.6.1. Calibration Curves

For analysis of albumin in artificial urine samples, calibration curves were prepared through replicate analysis of seven samples (37.5 μL each) spiked with varying concentrations of albumin (0, 2, 5, 10, 20, 40, and 60 mg/L). Samples were analyzed as described above.
To analyze creatinine in artificial urine samples, calibration curves were prepared through replicate analysis of seven samples (37.5 μL each) spiked with varying concentrations of creatinine (0, 0.1, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 mg/dL). Samples were analyzed as described above.

2.6.2. Accuracy

The accuracy of MyACR for determination of albumin in artificial urine samples was determined through replicate analysis of five sets of samples spiked with three different concentrations of albumin (10, 40, and 60 mg/L).
The accuracy of MyACR for the determination of creatinine in artificial urine samples was determined through replicate analysis of five sets of samples spiked with three different concentrations of creatinine (0.25, 1, and 2 mg/dL).
The accuracy of the assay method was reported as the percentage deviation of the mean value (% deviation of mean value (DMV)) from the theoretical value (laboratory spectrophotometer):
Accuracy (%) = [(mean − nominal)/nominal] × 100

2.6.3. Precision

The precision of MyACR for the determination of albumin in artificial urine samples based on within-day (repeatability) and day-to-day (reproducibility) variation was determined through replicate analysis of five sets of samples spiked with three different concentrations of albumin (10, 20, and 60 mg/L).
The precision of MyACR for the determination of creatinine in artificial urine samples based on within-day and day-to-day variation was determined through replicate analysis of five sets of samples spiked with three different concentrations of creatinine (0.25, 1, and 2 mg/dL).
The coefficient of variation (CV) was calculated from the ratio of standard deviation to the mean and expressed as a percentage:
% CV = standard deviation/mean × 100

2.6.4. Limit of Quantification

The limit of quantification (LOQ) of MyACR for the determination of albumin and creatinine in artificial urine samples was determined from the lowest concentration of albumin or creatinine (in spiked urine samples) that produced CV ≤ ±20% of spiked concentrations.

2.7. Specificity of Albumin Measurement in Imitating Pyuria and Hematuria Conditions

Blood samples were kindly provided by the blood bank at Thammasat Chalermprakiet Hospital. White blood cells (WBCs) and red blood cells (RBCs) were isolated using Histopaue media (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). In the first set of experiments, WBCs were spiked into artificial urine at a concentration of 5 × 105 cells/mL (the cut-off for pyuria is 10,000 cells/mL [26]). In the second set, RBCs were spiked into artificial urine at the same concentration of 5 × 105 cells/mL (the cut-off for hematuria is 20,000 cells/mL [27]). Additionally, a third set was spiked with both WBCs and RBCs into artificial urine at concentrations of 5 × 105 cells/mL each. The prepared samples were diluted with distilled water (DW) to a final ratio of 1:80 and then mixed with albumin reagent. All samples were prepared in triplicate, and absorbance was measured at 625 nm. Distilled water (DW) was used as the control.

2.8. Application of MyACR to Clinical Samples

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University (Project number MTU-EC-OO-2-1-168/66, approval number 266/2566). The study was conducted at Thammasat Chalermprakiet Hospital and the Thammasat University Center of Excellence in Pharmacology and Molecular Biology of Malaria and Cholangiocarcinoma, following the guidelines outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects before study participation.
Random urine samples (2–3 mL) were collected from 20 CKD patients. All samples were stored at −20 °C until analysis. Concentrations of albumin and creatinine in urine samples were measured as described above (single measurement for each patient), and the uACR values of each sample were determined using the MyACR device and compared with a laboratory spectrophotometer and a central (hospital) laboratory method (immune-based assay). The microalbumin method is based on particle-enhanced turbidimetric inhibition immunoassay. The creatinine method measures creatinine enzymatically by involving the addition of creatininase, creatinase, and sarcosine oxidase [28].

2.9. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 17.0 software. Quantitative variables are summarized as median (range) values. Deviation from the mean of the uACR values measured using MyACR and those measured using the standard spectrophotometer were calculated and are expressed as %DMV (% deviation from mean value). The correlation between the uACR values measured using both equipment was determined using Spearman’s correlation test at a statistical significance level of α = 0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Validation of Test Performance of MyACR Device

3.1.1. Calibration Curves

Urine analyses of albumin and creatinine using MyACR were calibrated using the concentration ranges of 0–60 mg/L and 0–2 mg/dL, respectively. All calibration ranges yielded linear relationships with correlation coefficients (R2) of 0.997 or better (Figure 3a,b and Figure 4a,b).

3.1.2. Accuracy

Good accuracy was observed from both the intra- and inter-day assays for determination of albumin and creatinine using MyACR, as indicated by the minimal deviation of mean values found with measured samples from those of the theoretical values (actual amount added), with a %MDV of lower than ≤5.42% at all investigated concentrations (Table 2 and Table 3).

3.1.3. Precision

Acceptable variation (intra- and inter-assay variation) of albumin and creatinine assays in artificial urine samples was observed with CV ≤ 12.69% at all investigated concentrations (Table 2 and Table 3).

3.1.4. Limit of Quantification

The LOQ of albumin and creatinine in urine samples determined using MyACR and a laboratory spectroscopy with %CV ≤ 20% were 5 mg/L and 0.25 mg/dL, respectively, using 37.5 µL urine samples.

3.2. Specificity of Albumin Measurement in Imitating Pyuria and Hematuria Conditions

The absorbances of samples, including the artificial urine spiked with 5 × 105 WBCs/mL, 5 × 105 RBCs/mL, and a combination of WBCs and RBCs at a concentration of 5 × 105 cells/mL each, are presented in Table 4. All conditions showed very slight differences from the distilled water control.

3.3. Application to Clinical Samples

To evaluate the clinical applicability of MyACR, the uACR values in urine samples of 20 CKD patients measured using MyACR were compared with those measured using the laboratory spectrophotometer and central (hospital) laboratory (immune-based assay) methods. The median (range) of %DMV of the spectrophotometer and immune-based method were −1.88 (−16.88 to 28.98)% and 3.48 (−17.05 to 21.64)%, respectively. The correlation of the values measured between the two methods was high, with an R2 of ≥0.98 (Figure 5a,b).

4. Discussion

Of all proteins, albumin, synthesized in the liver, is very important as an active substance in the human body. In healthy individuals, the albumin content in urine is typically less than 30 mg/g creatinine, and any value higher than this may indicate potential kidney disease [29]. Creatinine is the ultimate metabolite of nitrogen elements in the human body, primarily excreted from the blood by the kidneys, specifically through glomerular filtration. Low urinary excretion of creatinine reflects impairment of kidney function and corresponding renal diseases [30].
The use of the urine (random) albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) is currently recommended as the preferred screening strategy for determining the risk and monitoring the progress of CKD [31]. The standard method for uACR determination involves measuring albumin and creatinine separately using automated machines. The available analytical techniques used for detecting each substance are complex, time-consuming, and expensive, and they require modern and less portable instruments, high-cost analyses, large samples and reagent volumes, and the services of skilled medical technicians. Due to the low concentration of albumin in urine, it is difficult to measure the concentration level using a spectrophotometer and colorimetric methods [32], and more specific methods, such as immunoturbidimetry [33,34], immunoassays [35,36], radioimmunoassay [37], and liquid chromatography, have been applied [38]. In addition, several sensitive methods have been developed to determine microalbuminuria and/or uACR. These include paper-based analytical devices (PADs) [10,39,40,41,42,43], microfluidic sliding PAD [44], sequential injection analysis (SIA) [45,46], and the mono-segmented sequential injection lab-at-valve (SI-LAV) system [47]. Although the performance of some tests is considered good, they are time-consuming and require complicated devices or external tools, such as pumps and high-voltage machines, which are impractical for PoCT. Therefore, developing a simple device with a short analysis time is needed to be portable and affordable for the PoCT of CKD.
Research articles on developing PoCT devices for uACR measurement have highlighted technological advances, biosensor-based approaches, microfluidic systems, smartphone-based technologies, clinical validation studies, and challenges in translation and implementation. Biosensors typically involve immobilizing specific antibodies or aptamers on a sensor surface to capture albumin, followed by detecting creatinine or albumin–creatinine complexes. Such biosensors offer the advantages of rapid analysis, minimal sample volume requirements, and potential for PoCT. However, they may be susceptible to interference from matrix components or substances in biological samples, leading to false-positive or false-negative results. Some biosensors may exhibit limited sensitivity, particularly when detecting low concentrations of albumin or creatinine in urine samples [48]. Microfluidic-based PoCT devices have gained attention for their ability to perform complex sample handling and analysis tasks on a miniaturized platform [10,11,39,42]. Microfluidics have been integrated with sensing elements for uACR measurement, enabling precise control of sample flow and reaction kinetics. These systems may, however, encounter challenges related to sample handling, such as sample evaporation, air bubble formation, and clogging of microchannels. Smartphone-based PoCT devices have emerged as promising platforms for decentralized testing [49,50,51]. These devices leverage smartphones’ computational power and connectivity to perform uACR analysis using built-in cameras, sensors, and dedicated mobile applications. The measurement modes include colorimetric assay, fluorescence detection, and paper-based microfluidics. Smartphone-based assays may face compatibility issues with different smartphone models or operating systems, limiting their universal applicability.
The PoCT devices commercially available for determining uACR are immune-based assays. These include the DCA Vantage Analyzer (Siemens, Munich, Germany), AfinionTM AS100 Analyzer (Abbotts, Green Oaks, IL, USA), NycoCardTM READER II (Abbotts Rapid Diagnostics, Orlando, FL, USA), and QuikRead goTM Instrument (Orion Diagnostica, Espoo, Finland) [52]. While PoCT devices offer numerous advantages for uACR measurement, including rapid results, point-of-care testing, minimal sample volume, ease of use, and portability, they also present limitations related to cost, quality control, interference, regulatory compliance, and data management.
In this study, we developed MyACR as a PoCT for screening the risk and monitoring the progress of CKD using uACR as a biomarker. The device is portable, user-friendly, accurate, reproducible, and cost-effective, with comparable performance to a laboratory spectrophotometer. The analysis runtime is relatively short, with a reaction time of 30 min. Our device is capable of simultaneously measuring creatinine and albumin, resulting in an analysis time of less than 1 min. The test procedure is also simple. Its potential benefit for community healthcare facilities with limited laboratory resources needs further evaluation. Unskilled users can operate MyACR, and minimal to no auxiliary equipment is needed. The methods are based on colorimetric dye-forming reactions, in which the optical density of the color complex formed from each reaction is measured using visible UV at wavelengths of 515 nm (for creatinine) and 625 nm (for albumin). Moreover, the proposed system utilizes the slimmer cuvettes (12.5 × 7.5 × 45 mm) rather than the conventional cuvettes (12.5 × 12.5 × 45 mm) in a spectrophotometer with the same pathlength (10 mm) to reduce the measuring solution volume. The device can simultaneously measure both compounds and provide the uACR for each sample. The Jaffe reaction is the most commonly used method for creatinine determination, relying on the formation of an absorbing complex during the reaction of creatinine with picric acid. Several dyes have been used in the albumin reaction, including bromocresol green and bromocresol purple [53], bromophenol blue [54], tetrabromophenol blue [55], bromochlorophenol blue [56], Commassie Brillant Blue G [57], and eosin [58] dyes. Calibration curves for both compounds can be prepared only once when the device is first used, and the information is recorded in the device database. uACR can be measured in a single random urine sample without the requirement of batch analysis. The accuracy and reproducibility of both assay methods are within acceptable ranges (%DVM ≤ 5.42%, %CV ≤ 12.69%). Although the methods are based on spectroscopic assays, the sensitivity of the albumin and creatinine analyses is within an acceptable range. It is adequate to detect microalbuminuria (LOQ) of 5 mg/L and 0.25 mg/dL for albumin and creatinine, respectively. Due to the low sensitivity of albumin, we consider the lowest concentration that provided accuracy and precision within ±20% to be the LOQ. This criterion is based on the ICH guidelines, and the acceptance criteria for accuracy and precision at low concentrations should be within ±20% [59]. Quality control (QC) samples (with three concentrations, low, medium, and high) should be integrated into the analysis at least once every two weeks. An acceptable deviation of uACR values from each QC sample is ±5%. New calibration curves are required to accurately analyze uACR in the case of deviation outside of this acceptable limit. In addition, glomerulonephritis as well as pyelonephritis, which are abnormal kidney conditions, can present with pyuria or hematuria. To confirm the specificity of the reaction method to only albumin, artificial urine spiked with WBCs, RBCs, and a combination of WBCs and RBCs was analyzed. The absorbance results showed very slight differences in the absorbance of the spiked samples compared to the distilled water control. The concentration of WBCs and RBCs used was 5 × 105 cells/mL, which is higher than the cut-off for pyuria (10,000 cells/mL [26]) and hematuria (20,000 cells/mL [27]) conditions. The clinical applicability of MyACR to determine uACR was well-demonstrated in urine samples collected from 20 CKD patients. An excellent correlation (r2 > 0.98) was found between the values measured by the device compared with the laboratory spectrophotometer and the gold standard method used in the central (hospital) laboratory (immune-based assay).
While PoCT devices offer numerous advantages for uACR measurement, including rapid results, point-of-care testing, minimal sample volume, ease of use, and portability, they also present limitations related to cost, quality control, interference, regulatory compliance, and data management.

5. Conclusions

MyACR, a simple platform based on colorimetric detection for the determination of uACR, was developed for use as a PoCT for determining the risk and monitoring the progress of CKD. The device showed satisfactory accuracy, reproducibility, sensitivity, and specificity test performance. Cost-effectiveness and improvement in clinical decision making need to be proven in future multisite community and home studies. Validation of the clinical application of the device in a large sample size, including healthy subjects, CDK patients, and different groups of patients at risk of CKD (particularly those with diabetes and hypertension), is underway.

6. Patents

The innovation patent ‘MyACR’ is approved by the Department of Intellectual Property of Thailand (No. 2302005386).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, all authors; methodology, N.M., K.N.-B., T.P., N.Y. and W.C.; software, W.M.; validation, N.M., K.N.-B. and N.Y.; formal analysis, N.M. and K.N.-B.; investigation, N.M., N.Y. and W.C.; writing—original draft preparation, N.M. and K.N.-B.; writing—review and editing, N.M. and K.N.-B.; funding acquisition, W.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The study was supported by the Center of Excellence in Pharmacology and Molecular Biology of Malaria and Cholangiocarcinoma, Thammasat University and National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT): Contract number N42A671041.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University (Project number MTU-EC-OO-2-1-168/66, approval number 266/2566). The study was conducted at Thammasat Chalermprakiet Hospital and the Thammasat University Center of Excellence in Pharmacology and Molecular Biology of Malaria and Cholangiocarcinoma, following the guidelines outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Arthitaya Tiengsusuk and Rehab Osman Taha for their assistance in technical support and sample collection.

Conflicts of Interest

Napaporn Youngvises and Wanchai Meesiri are affiliated with Bangkok High Lab Co., Ltd. However, there are no conflicts of interest related to this manuscript. The other authors also declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Neuen, B.L.; Chadban, S.J.; Demaio, A.R.; Johnson, D.W.; Perkovic, V. Chronic kidney disease and the global NCDs agenda. BMJ Glob. Health 2017, 2, e000380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Francis, A.; Harhay, M.N.; Ong, A.C.M.; Tummalapalli, S.L.; Ortiz, A.; Fogo, A.B.; Fliser, D.; Roy-Chaudhury, P.; Fontana, M.; Nangaku, M.; et al. Chronic kidney disease and the global public health agenda: An international consensus. Nat. Rev. Nephrol. 2024, 20, 473–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Monhart, V. Hypertension and chronic kidney diseases. Cor. Vasa 2013, 55, e397–e402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Feher, M. Diabetes: Chronic Complications, 2nd ed.; Shaw, K.M., Cummings, M.H., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2005; Volume 22, p. 327. [Google Scholar]
  5. Vaidya, S.R.; Aeddula, N.R. Chronic Kidney Disease. Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK535404/ (accessed on 20 May 2024).
  6. Jha, V.; Garcia-Garcia, G.; Iseki, K.; Li, Z.; Naicker, S.; Plattner, B.; Saran, R.; Wang, A.Y.; Yang, C.W. Chronic kidney disease: Global dimension and perspectives. Lancet 2013, 382, 260–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Chen, T.K.; Knicely, D.H.; Grams, M.E. Chronic kidney disease diagnosis and management: A review. JAMA 2019, 322, 1294–1304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Sumida, K.; Nadkarni, G.N.; Grams, M.E.; Sang, Y.; Ballew, S.H.; Coresh, J.; Matsushita, K.; Surapaneni, A.; Brunskill, N.; Chadban, S.J.; et al. Conversion of urine protein-creatinine ratio or urine dipstick protein to urine albumin-creatinine ratio for use in chronic kidney disease screening and prognosis: An individual participant-based meta-analysis. Ann. Intern. Med. 2020, 173, 426–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Ying, T.; Clayton, P.; Naresh, C.; Chadban, S. Predictive value of spot versus 24-hour measures of proteinuria for death, end-stage kidney disease or chronic kidney disease progression. BMC Nephrol. 2018, 19, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Chaiyo, S.; Kalcher, K.; Apilux, A.; Chailapakul, O. A Novel Paper-based Colorimetry device for the determination of the albumin to creatinine ratio. Analyst 2018, 143, 5453–5460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lin, C.-C.; Hsu, J.-L.; Tseng, C.-C.; Lee, G.-B. An integrated microfluidic system for the determination of microalbuminuria by measuring the albumin-to-creatinine ratio. Microfluid Nanofluidics 2011, 10, 1055–1067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Weaver, R.G.; James, M.T.; Ravani, P.; Weaver, C.G.W.; Lamb, E.J.; Tonelli, M.; Manns, B.J.; Quinn, R.R.; Jun, M.; Hemmelgarn, B.R. Estimating urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio from protein-to-creatinine ratio: Development of equations using same-day measurements. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2020, 31, 591–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Mogensen, C.E. Microalbuminuria predicts clinical proteinuria and early mortality in maturity-onset diabetes. N. Engl. J. Med. 1984, 310, 356–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Ansar, M.M.; ShahrokhiRad, R.; Lebady, M.K. Risk factors of microalbuminuria and macroalbuminuria in type 2 diabetic patients in north of Iran—Rasht. Nephro-Urol. Mon. 2017, 9, e40031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Jensen, M.B.; Viken, I.; Høgh, F.; Jacobsen, K.K. Quantification of urinary albumin and -creatinine: A comparison study of two analytical methods and their impact on albumin to creatinine ratio. Clin. Biochem. 2022, 108, 5–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Martin, H. Laboratory measurement of urine albumin and urine total protein in screening for proteinuria in chronic kidney disease. Clin. Biochem. Rev. 2011, 32, 97–102. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  17. Küme, T.; Sağlam, B.; Ergon, C.; Sisman, A.R. Evaluation and comparison of Abbott Jaffe and enzymatic creatinine methods: Could the old method meet the new requirements? J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 2018, 32, e22168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Narimani, R.; Esmaeili, M.; Rasta, S.H.; Khosroshahi, H.T.; Mobed, A. Trend in creatinine determining methods: Conventional methods to molecular-based methods. Anal. Sci. Adv. 2021, 2, 308–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Chutipongtanate, S.; Thongboonkerd, V. Systematic comparisons of artificial urine formulas for in vitro cellular study. Anal. Biochem. 2010, 402, 110–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Keane, W.F.; Eknoyan, G. Proteinuria, albuminuria, risk, assessment, detection, elimination (PARADE): A position paper of the National Kidney Foundation. Am. J. Kidney. Dis. 1999, 33, 1004–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 11. Chronic Kidney Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2024. Diabetes Care 2023, 47, S219–S230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ratanawimarnwong, N.; Ponhong, K.; Teshima, N.; Nacapricha, D.; Grudpan, K.; Sakai, T.; Motomizu, S. Simultaneous injection effective mixing flow analysis of urinary albumin using dye-binding reaction. Talanta 2012, 96, 50–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Sittiwong, J.; Unob, F. Detection of urinary creatinine using gold nanoparticles after solid phase extraction. Spectrochim. Acta A Mol. Biomol. Spectrosc. 2015, 138, 381–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Delanghe, J.R.; Speeckaert, M.M. Creatinine determination according to Jaffe—What does it stand for? Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. Plus 2011, 4, 83–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Dasgupta, P.; Kumar, V.; Krishnaswamy, P.R.; Bhat, N. Development of biosensor for detection of serum creatinine. CSI Trans. ICT 2018, 6, 5–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Shaikh, N.; Shope, T.R.; Hoberman, A.; Vigliotti, A.; Kurs-Lasky, M.; Martin, J.M. Association Between Uropathogen and Pyuria. Pediatrics 2016, 138, e20160087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Cho, H.; Yoo, J.; Kim, H.; Jang, H.; Kim, Y.; Chae, H. Diagnostic Characteristics of Urinary Red Blood Cell Distribution Incorporated in UF-5000 for Differentiation of Glomerular and Non-Glomerular Hematuria. Ann. Lab. Med. 2022, 42, 160–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Li, B.; Thompson, S.; Igot, K.; King, R.; Doogue, M.; Florkowski, C. Artefactually low creatinine by Beckman Coulter enzymatic method due to immunoglobulin M paraprotein interference. Ann. Clin. Biochem. 2023, 60, 423–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Sung, K.C.; Ryu, S.; Lee, J.Y.; Lee, S.H.; Cheong, E.; Hyun, Y.Y.; Lee, K.B.; Kim, H.; Byrne, C.D. Urine albumin/creatinine ratio below 30 mg/g is a predictor of incident hypertension and cardiovascular mortality. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2016, 5, e003245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Myers, G.L.; Miller, W.G.; Coresh, J.; Fleming, J.; Greenberg, N.; Greene, T.; Hostetter, T.; Levey, A.S.; Panteghini, M.; Welch, M.; et al. Recommendations for improving serum creatinine measurement: A report from the laboratory working group of the national kidney disease education program. Clin. Chem. 2006, 52, 5–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Tziakas, D.; Chalikias, G.; Kareli, D.; Tsigalou, C.; Risgits, A.; Kikas, P.; Makrygiannis, D.; Chatzikyriakou, S.; Kampouromiti, G.; Symeonidis, D.; et al. Spot urine albumin to creatinine ratio outperforms novel acute kidney injury biomarkers in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Int. J. Cardiol. 2015, 197, 48–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Schosinsky, K.H.; Vargas, M.; Luz Esquivel, A.; Chavarria, M.A. Simple spectrophotometric determination of urinary albumin by dye-binding with use of bromphenol blue. Clin. Chem. 1987, 33, 223–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Teppo, A.M. Immunoturbidimetry of albumin and immunoglobulin G in urine. Clin. Chem. 1982, 28, 1359–1361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Bhatt, V.R.; Khese, V.B.; Jadhav, S.L.; Kakrani, A.L. Urinary albumin excretion, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and prevalence of microalbuminuria in obese nondiabetic and nonhypertensive adults: A cross-sectional study. Indian J. Nephrol. 2019, 29, 166–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Huang, Z.; Zhang, R.; Chen, H.; Weng, W.; Lin, Q.; Deng, D.; Li, Z.; Kong, J. Sensitive polydopamine bi-functionalized SERS immunoassay for microalbuminuria detection. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2019, 142, 111542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Shaikh, M.O.; Zhu, P.Y.; Wang, C.C.; Du, Y.C.; Chuang, C.H. Electrochemical immunosensor utilizing electrodeposited Au nanocrystals and dielectrophoretically trapped PS/Ag/ab-HSA nanoprobes for detection of microalbuminuria at point of care. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2019, 126, 572–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Woo, J.; Floyd, M.; Cannon, D.C.; Kahan, B. Radioimmunoassay for urinary albumin. Clin. Chem. 1978, 24, 1464–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Comper, W.D.; Jerums, G.; Osicka, T.M. Differences in urinary albumin detected by four immunoassays and high-performance liquid chromatography. Clin. Biochem. 2004, 37, 105–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Hiraoka, R.; Kuwahara, K.; Wen, Y.C.; Yen, T.H.; Hiruta, Y.; Cheng, C.M.; Citterio, D. Paper-based device for naked eye urinary albumin/creatinine ratio evaluation. ACS Sens. 2020, 5, 1110–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Chagas, C.L.S.; de Souza, F.R.; Cardoso, T.M.G.; Moreira, R.C.; da Silva, J.A.F.; de Jesus, D.P.; Coltro, W.K.T. A fully disposable paper-based electrophoresis microchip with integrated pencil-drawn electrodes for contactless conductivity detection. Anal. Methods 2016, 8, 6682–6686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Heist, C.A.; Bandara, G.C.; Bemis, D.J.; Pommerenck, J.C.; Remcho, V.T. New paper-based microfluidic tools for the analysis of blood serum protein and creatinine built via aerosolized deposition of polycaprolactone. Anal. Methods 2018, 10, 2994–3000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Cai, Y.; Niu, J.-C.; Liu, Y.-Q.; Du, X.-L.; Wu, Z.-Y. Online sample clean-up and enrichment of proteins from salty media with dynamic double gradients on a paper fluidic channel. Anal. Chim. Acta 2020, 1100, 149–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Nurrahmah, N.; Amalia, K.T.; Sulistyarti, H.; Sabarudin, A. Fast colorimetric detection of albumin-to-creatinine ratio using paper-based analytical devices with alkaline picrate and Bromothymol Blue reagents. J. App. Pharm. Sci. 2022, 12, 140–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Chen, S.J.; Tseng, C.C.; Huang, K.H.; Chang, Y.C.; Fu, L.M. Microfluidic sliding paper-based device for point-of-care determination of albumin-to-creatine ratio in human urine. Biosensors 2022, 12, 496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Siangproh, W.; Teshima, N.; Sakai, T.; Katoh, S.; Chailapakul, O. Alternative method for measurement of albumin/creatinine ratio using spectrophotometric sequential injection analysis. Talanta 2009, 79, 1111–1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Sabarudin, A. Sequential injection at valve mixing (SI-VM) for determination of albumin-creatinine ratio in urine. Orient. J. Chem. 2018, 34, 730–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kiwfo, K.; Wongwilai, W.; Sakai, T.; Teshima, N.; Grudpan, K. Determination of albumin, glucose, and creatinine employing a single sequential injection lab-at-valve with mono-segmented flow system enabling in-line dilution, in-line single-standard calibration, and in-line standard addition. Molecules 2020, 25, 1666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Tseng, C.C.; Ko, C.H.; Lu, S.Y.; Yang, C.E.; Fu, L.M.; Li, C.Y. Rapid electrochemical-biosensor microchip platform for determination of microalbuminuria in CKD patients. Anal. Chim Acta 2021, 1146, 70–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Thakur, R.; Maheshwari, P.; Datta, S.K.; Dubey, S.K.; Shakher, C. Machine learning-based rapid diagnostic-test reader for albuminuria using smartphone. IEEE Sens. J. 2021, 21, 14011–14026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhang, Q.; Wang, G.; Zong, X.; Sun, J. Performance evaluation of Hipee S2 point-of-care testing urine dipstick analyser: A cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2022, 12, e063781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Jia, Y.; Liu, G.; Xu, G.; Li, X.; Shi, Z.; Cheng, C.; Xu, D.; Lu, Y.; Liu, Q. Battery-free and wireless tag for in situ sensing of urinary albumin/creatinine ratio (ACR) for the assessment of albuminuria. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2022, 367, 132050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Luppa, P.B.; Müller, C.; Schlichtiger, A.; Schlebusch, H. Point-of-care testing (POCT): Current techniques and future perspectives. Trends Analyt. Chem. 2011, 30, 887–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Suzuki, Y. Reaction between pH indicators with a large pKa value and human serum albumin and its application to the determination of the serum albumin concentration. Bunseki Kagaku 2003, 52, 939–944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Jung, K.; Nickel, E.; Pergande, M. A microalbuminuria assay using bromphenol blue. Clin. Chim. Acta 1990, 187, 163–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Pugia, M.J.; Lott, J.A.; Profitt, J.A.; Cast, T.K. High-sensitivity dye binding assay for albumin in urine. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 1999, 13, 180–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Yoshimoto, K.; Kaneko, E.; Yotsuyanagi, T. Analytical chemistry for environmental and human health. Visual determination of protein in urine using bromochlorophenol blue and a membrane filter. Bunseki Kagaku 2000, 49, 363–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Marshall, T.; Williams, K.M. Interference in the coomassie brilliant blue and pyrogallol red protein dye-binding assays is increased by the addition of sodium dodecyl sulfate to the dye reagents. Anal. Biochem. 2004, 331, 255–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Waheed, A.A.; Rao, K.S.; Gupta, P.D. Mechanism of dye binding in the protein assay using eosin dyes. Anal. Biochem. 2000, 287, 73–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. ICH Harmonised Guideline. ICH Guideline Q2(R2) on Validation of Analytical Procedures. Available online: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/ich-guideline-q2r2-validation-analytical-procedures-step-2b_en.pdf (accessed on 20 May 2024).
Diagnostics 14 01702 g001
Figure 1. (a) MyACR device and (b) measurement platform.
Figure 1. (a) MyACR device and (b) measurement platform.
Diagnostics 14 01702 g001
Diagnostics 14 01702 g002
Figure 2. Schematic diagram showing the operational workflow of MyACR.
Figure 2. Schematic diagram showing the operational workflow of MyACR.
Diagnostics 14 01702 g002
Diagnostics 14 01702 g003
Figure 3. Calibration curves of albumin at the concentration range of 0–60 mg/dL determined using (a) MyACR and (b) a laboratory spectrophotometer.
Figure 3. Calibration curves of albumin at the concentration range of 0–60 mg/dL determined using (a) MyACR and (b) a laboratory spectrophotometer.
Diagnostics 14 01702 g003
Diagnostics 14 01702 g004
Figure 4. Calibration curves of creatinine at the concentration range of 0–2 mg/dL determined using (a) MyACR and (b) a laboratory spectrophotometer.
Figure 4. Calibration curves of creatinine at the concentration range of 0–2 mg/dL determined using (a) MyACR and (b) a laboratory spectrophotometer.
Diagnostics 14 01702 g004
Diagnostics 14 01702 g005
Figure 5. Correlation between uACR measured using (a) MyACR vs. laboratory spectrophotometer and (b) MyACR vs. immune-based assay (gold standard) from 20 subjects. The reactions used for albumin and creatinine measurement using MyACR and a laboratory spectrophotometer are the dye (tetrabromophenol blue)-binding assay and the colorimetric Jaffe assay, respectively. The reactions used for albumin and creatinine measurement in the central (hospital) laboratory are an immune-based assay and an enzymatic method, respectively.
Figure 5. Correlation between uACR measured using (a) MyACR vs. laboratory spectrophotometer and (b) MyACR vs. immune-based assay (gold standard) from 20 subjects. The reactions used for albumin and creatinine measurement using MyACR and a laboratory spectrophotometer are the dye (tetrabromophenol blue)-binding assay and the colorimetric Jaffe assay, respectively. The reactions used for albumin and creatinine measurement in the central (hospital) laboratory are an immune-based assay and an enzymatic method, respectively.
Diagnostics 14 01702 g005
Table 1. Composition of artificial urine used to evaluate the test performance of MyACR [19].
Table 1. Composition of artificial urine used to evaluate the test performance of MyACR [19].
CompositionMolecular
Formula		Molecular Weight (g/mol)Final Concentration
(mM)
Sodium sulfate anhydrousNa2SO4142.049
Trisodium citrate dihydrateNa3C6H5O7·2H2O294.15
UreaCH4N2O60.06200
Potassium chlorideKCl74.5530
Sodium chlorideNaCl58.4454
Calcium chlorideCaCl2110.993
Ammonium chlorideNH4Cl53.4915
Magnesium sulfate
heptahydrate		MgSO4·7H2O246.472
Sodium phosphate monobasic monohydrateNaH2PO4·H2O137.993.6
Sodium phosphate dibasic heptahydrateNa2HPO4·7H2O268.030.4
Sodium bicarbonateNaHCO384.012
Disodium oxalateNa2C2O41340.1
Table 2. Intra- and inter-assay precision and accuracy of albumin assay determined using MyACR compared with a laboratory spectrophotometer.
Table 2. Intra- and inter-assay precision and accuracy of albumin assay determined using MyACR compared with a laboratory spectrophotometer.
Albumin Concentration
Added (mg/L)		Precision (%CV)Accuracy (%DVM)
Intra-DayInter-DayIntra-DayInter-Day
MyACR
102.524.581.434.29
401.343.022.361.07
601.442.75−0.90−1.57
Spectrophotometer
102.863.773.516.22
400.301.001.962.50
601.420.87−0.95−0.95
Table 3. Intra- and inter-assay precision and accuracy of creatinine assay using MyACR compared with a laboratory spectrophotometer.
Table 3. Intra- and inter-assay precision and accuracy of creatinine assay using MyACR compared with a laboratory spectrophotometer.
Creatinine Concentration Added (mg/L)Precision (%CV)Accuracy (%DVM)
Intra-DayINTER-DAYIntra-DayInter-Day
MyACR
0.251.2112.695.42−2.82
11.084.544.771.03
21.353.53−2.57−4.14
Spectrophotometer
0.251.992.352.613.83
11.252.32−0.151.43
21.422.40−0.201.23
Table 4. Specificity of albumin measurement in imitating pyuria and hematuria conditions.
Table 4. Specificity of albumin measurement in imitating pyuria and hematuria conditions.
ConditionsAbsorbance at 625 nm [Median (Range)]
SpectrophotometerMyACR
Artificial urine spiked with distilled water (control)0 (0 to 0)0 (0 to 0)
Artificial urine spiked with WBCs0 (0 to 0.001)−0.003 (−0.003 to 0)
Artificial urine spiked with RBCs0.001 (0.001 to 0.002)−0.003 (−0.005 to −0.002)
Artificial urine spiked with WBCs and RBCs0.002 (0.002 to 0.002)0.004 (−0.005 to −0.003)
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Muhamad, N.; Youngvises, N.; Plengsuriyakarn, T.; Meesiri, W.; Chaijaroenkul, W.; Na-Bangchang, K. MyACR: A Point-of-Care Medical Device for Determination of Albumin–Creatinine Ratio (uACR) in Random Urine Samples as a Marker of Nephropathy. Diagnostics 2024, 14, 1702. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14161702

AMA Style

Muhamad N, Youngvises N, Plengsuriyakarn T, Meesiri W, Chaijaroenkul W, Na-Bangchang K. MyACR: A Point-of-Care Medical Device for Determination of Albumin–Creatinine Ratio (uACR) in Random Urine Samples as a Marker of Nephropathy. Diagnostics. 2024; 14(16):1702. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14161702

Chicago/Turabian Style

Muhamad, Nadda, Napaporn Youngvises, Tullayakorn Plengsuriyakarn, Wanchai Meesiri, Wanna Chaijaroenkul, and Kesara Na-Bangchang. 2024. "MyACR: A Point-of-Care Medical Device for Determination of Albumin–Creatinine Ratio (uACR) in Random Urine Samples as a Marker of Nephropathy" Diagnostics 14, no. 16: 1702. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14161702

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Article metric data becomes available approximately 24 hours after publication online.
Back to TopTop