- Detects only trimeric “intact PINP” isoform – which provides an accurate bone formation indicator in renal impaired patients
- Excellent correlation to existing Intact PINP RIA method – eliminates costly radioactive licensing and waste disposal
- Combining the Intact PINP with the established IDS-iSYS CTX-I (CrossLaps®) assays from a single sample tube provides an effective tool in the monitoring of osteoporosis treatment and identifying patients at increased risk
- Correct results independent of kidney function
- A reference marker for osteoporosis management as indicated by IOF, IFCC and NBHA
- Accurate results – no overestimation due to increased levels of PINP monomer
- A complete clinical assay panel supporting bone disease management
The IDS-iSYS Intact PINP amino-terminal propeptide of type I procollagen assay is intended for the quantitative determination of intact PINP in human serum or plasma on the IDS-iSYS Multi-Discipline Automated System.
The amino-terminal propeptide of type I procollagen (PINP) is probably the most specific and sensitive marker of bone formation1.
PINP is a particular useful marker for monitoring the efficacy of osteoporosis therapy with anabolic agents2, 3 but it is also one of the best bone turnover markers for monitoring the efficacy of anti-resorptive therapy.
The IOF and the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) experts recommend that s-PINP and s-CTX are used as reference analytes for bone turnover markers in observational and intervention studies.
Morovat A. et al. IDS iSYS automated intact procollagen-1-Nterminus pro-peptide assay: method evaluation
Koivula M-K. Difference between total and intact assays for N-terminal propeptide of type I procollagen reflects degradation of pN-collagen rather than denaturation of intact propeptide. Ann Clin Biochem 2010; 47: 67–71.
Vasikaran SD et al. Markers of bone turnover for the prediction of fracture risk and monitoring of osteoporosis treatment: a need for international reference standards. Osteoporos Int. 2010; 22(2):391-420.