Literature DB >> 21749873

Comparison of four distinct detection platforms using multiple ligand binding assay formats.

Catherine I Soderstrom1, Franklin P Spriggs, Wei Song, Sarah Burrell.   

Abstract

Several detection platforms are available for ligand binding assays (LBA), each claiming superiority in sensitivity and dynamic range. However, little information exists in the literature directly comparing the various LBA platforms for quantitation. We have tested four common platforms to evaluate and compare the interchangeability of detection platforms by comparing sensitivity and dynamic range to a colorimetric LBA. The detection platforms compared are: colorimetric, chemiluminescence, time-resolved fluorescence (TRF) and electrochemiluminescence (ECL). Five different LBA protocols were tested with each of the detection endpoints. The assay protocols include the following ligand binding assay formats: direct binding, sandwich ELISA, competitive and cell based ELISA. We found that no detection platform consistently performed better than all the others and it was not possible to predict which platform would perform best for a given assay protocol. We also found surprising differences in assays (plate coating efficiency, low signal) which add to difficulty in choosing the best platform ad hoc. We propose here that in developing new assay protocols for detection of biotherapeutic agents, multiple detection platforms should be tested in order to forward the best assays possible and for the right reasons.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21749873     DOI: 10.1016/j.jim.2011.06.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Immunol Methods        ISSN: 0022-1759            Impact factor:   2.303


  4 in total

1.  Ligand binding assays in the 21st Century laboratory: platforms.

Authors:  Franklin P Spriggs; Zhandong Don Zhong; Afshin Safavi; Darshana Jani; Narasaiah Dontha; Anita Kant; Jenny Ly; Lia Brilando; Karolina Österlund; Nathalie Rouleau; Saloumeh Kadkhodayan Fischer; Martin Boissonneault; Chad Ray
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.009

Review 2.  Assay formats: Recommendation for best practices and harmonization from the global bioanalysis consortium harmonization team.

Authors:  Sherri Dudal; Daniel Baltrukonis; Rebecca Crisino; M Jaya Goyal; Alison Joyce; Karolina Osterlund; John Smeraglia; Yoshitaka Taniguchi; Jihong Yang
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2013-12-17       Impact factor: 4.009

3.  Thin-layer matrix sublimation with vapor-sorption induced co-crystallization for sensitive and reproducible SAMDI-TOF MS analysis of protein biosensors.

Authors:  Michael J Roth; Jaekuk Kim; Erica M Maresh; Daniel A Plymire; John R Corbett; Junmei Zhang; Steven M Patrie
Journal:  J Am Soc Mass Spectrom       Date:  2012-07-31       Impact factor: 3.109

4.  Evaluation of acoustic membrane microparticle (AMMP) technology for a sensitive ligand binding assay to support pharmacokinetic determinations of a biotherapeutic.

Authors:  Shannon D Chilewski; W Matthew Dickerson; Johanna R Mora; Ashley Saab; Edward M Alderman
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2014-09-23       Impact factor: 4.009

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.