Back to Search Start Over

Comparative evaluation of two immunoassays for cerebrospinal fluid β-Amyloid 1-42 measurement.

Authors :
Zecca C
Brescia V
Piccininni M
Capozzo R
Barone R
Barulli MR
Logroscino G
Source :
Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry [Clin Chim Acta] 2019 Jun; Vol. 493, pp. 107-111. Date of Electronic Publication: 2019 Mar 04.
Publication Year :
2019

Abstract

Aim of the Study: Beta-Amyloid 1-42 peptide (βA42) is a cerebro-spinal fluid (CSF) biomarker, key element of the NIA Alzheimer's disease diagnostic criteria. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) has been the mainstay method for βA42 measurement on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Recently, a new βA42 measurement method in chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA) is available on Lumipulse G 600 II automatic platform. The aim of the work was to evaluate the concordance of the ELISA and the new method (CLEIA) in the CSF βA42 levels measurement.<br />Materials and Methods: CSF βA42 levels were assayed in 49 samples using the ELISA method (Innotest β- amyloid 1-42, Fujirebio Europe N.V., Gent, Belgium) and CLEIA method on Lumipulse G600II fully automatic platform (Lumipulse G β- amyloid 1-42, Fujirebio Europe N.V., Gent, Belgium). We compared values of the two methods using acceptability interval based on Inherent Combined Imprecision (ICI), the Passing-Bablok regression analysis, the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) and the Bland-Altman plot.<br />Results: The analysis of the ICI showed that the two methods differ substantially. The regression equation (y = -103.04 + 1.52×) highlighted the presence of proportional systematic difference, without significant deviation from linearity (p = .42). The Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.826. The Bland-Altman plot analysis showed a significant systematic difference in the two methods: ELISA measurements were in average -27.06% (95% CI -31.89 to -22.23%) lower compared to CLEIA ones.<br />Conclusions: Our study highlighted a difference between the two methods. Therefore, the cut-off for the normal levels of βA42 should be reviewed in the laboratory report.<br /> (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1873-3492
Volume :
493
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
30844363
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2019.02.033