Britt-Marie Loo1, Jukka Marniemi, Antti Jula. 1. National Institute for Health and Welfare, Department of Chronic Disease Prevention, Turku, Finland. britt-marie.loo@thl.fi
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many different multiplex biomarker immunoassays based on Luminex®-technology have been developed during recent years. We have evaluated the performance of two multiplex immunoassays for determination of adiponectin, resistin, ghrelin and leptin in comparison to corresponding, conventional ELISA assays. METHODS: Human serum or plasma samples were analysed by commercially available multiplex and ELISA immunoassays manufactured by Millipore Corp. RESULTS: The correlation between tested multiplex and ELISA immunoassays was good, r > 0.9 for all analytes. The agreement between the methods was acceptable but there were differences in analytical levels. Intra- and inter-assay variation was comparable between both assays. The coefficient of variation for all analytes, independent of method, was ≤15% and for most of them <10%. CONCLUSION: The performance of the tested multiplex assays was reasonable and they can be considered as valid options to the conventional ELISA assays. However, results obtained with the two different techniques are not necessarily interchangeable due to differences in the concentration levels.
BACKGROUND: Many different multiplex biomarker immunoassays based on Luminex®-technology have been developed during recent years. We have evaluated the performance of two multiplex immunoassays for determination of adiponectin, resistin, ghrelin and leptin in comparison to corresponding, conventional ELISA assays. METHODS:Human serum or plasma samples were analysed by commercially available multiplex and ELISA immunoassays manufactured by Millipore Corp. RESULTS: The correlation between tested multiplex and ELISA immunoassays was good, r > 0.9 for all analytes. The agreement between the methods was acceptable but there were differences in analytical levels. Intra- and inter-assay variation was comparable between both assays. The coefficient of variation for all analytes, independent of method, was ≤15% and for most of them <10%. CONCLUSION: The performance of the tested multiplex assays was reasonable and they can be considered as valid options to the conventional ELISA assays. However, results obtained with the two different techniques are not necessarily interchangeable due to differences in the concentration levels.
Authors: Fen Wu; Farzana Jasmine; Muhammad G Kibriya; Mengling Liu; Oktawia Wójcik; Faruque Parvez; Ronald Rahaman; Shantanu Roy; Rachelle Paul-Brutus; Stephanie Segers; Vesna Slavkovich; Tariqul Islam; Diane Levy; Jacob L Mey; Alexander van Geen; Joseph H Graziano; Habibul Ahsan; Yu Chen Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Renee D Stapleton; Benjamin T Suratt; Margaret J Neff; Mark M Wurfel; Lorraine B Ware; John T Ruzinski; Ellen Caldwell; Teal S Hallstrand; Polly E Parsons Journal: Biomarkers Date: 2019-03-04 Impact factor: 2.658
Authors: Consuelo Treviño-Garza; Leonardo Mancillas-Adame; Cynthia M Estrada-Zúñiga; Jesús Z Villarreal-Pérez; Laura Villarreal-Martinez; Manuel E De la O-Cavazos Journal: J Clin Lab Anal Date: 2015-03-26 Impact factor: 2.352
Authors: Nora Hedbäck; Morten Hindsø; Kirstine N Bojsen-Møller; Adelaide K Linddal; Nils B Jørgensen; Carsten Dirksen; Andreas Møller; Viggo B Kristiansen; Bolette Hartmann; Jens J Holst; Maria S Svane; Sten Madsbad Journal: Front Nutr Date: 2022-04-29