| Literature DB >> 30058083 |
Clare E Tange1, Amrit Kaur1, Nisha Verma2, Alaco Hickey2, Sofia Grigoriadou2, Chris Scott2, Sorena Kiani2, Rachael Steven3, Mark Ponsford3, Tariq El-Shanawany3, Stephen Jolles3, Stephen Harding1, Antony R Parker1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Impaired levels or function of C1 inhibitor (C1-INH) results in angioedema due to increased bradykinin. It is important to distinguish between angioedema related to C1-INH deficiency and that caused by other mechanisms, as treatment options are different. In hereditary (HAE) and acquired (AAE) angioedema, C1-INH concentration is measured to aid patient diagnosis. Here, we describe an automated turbidimetric assay to measure C1-INH concentration on the Optilite® analyzer.Entities:
Keywords: zzm321990AAEzzm321990; zzm321990HAEzzm321990; C1 inactivator; C1 inhibitor; C1-INH; Optilite; angioedema; complement; turbidimetric
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30058083 PMCID: PMC6430339 DOI: 10.1002/jcla.22627
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Lab Anal ISSN: 0887-8013 Impact factor: 2.352
Figure 1Assessment of C1‐INH antisera. 10% SDS‐PAGE gels were loaded with a protein ladder (lane 1) and various pure proteins; lane 2‐C1‐INH, 3‐Factor XIa, 4‐Factor XIIa, 5‐Kallikrein, 6‐C1r, 7‐C1s, 8‐C2, 9‐C3c, 10‐C4, 11‐Factor B, 12‐Properdin. A, 0.5 μg of each protein was added for western blotting with C1‐INH antiserum. B, 2 μg of each protein was added for Coomassie blue staining
Figure 2Linearity of the Optilite C1‐INH assay. Ten samples were generated by diluting a serum sample with a high C1‐INH concentration in a serum sample with a low concentration of C1‐INH. Samples were run in triplicate and the mean result for each concentration was plotted against the expected C1‐INH concentration. Identity line shown where y = x
Imprecision of automated Optilite C1‐INH assay
| C1‐INH Concentration (g/L) | Within‐run | Between‐run | Between‐day | Between‐batch | Between‐ instrument | Total Precision | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % CV | SD | % CV | SD | % CV | SD | % CV | SD | % CV | SD | % CV | SD | |
| 0.127 | 1.9 | 0.00 | 5.7 | 0.01 | 4.7 | 0.01 | 0.6 | 0.00 | 2.5 | 0.00 | 7.6 | 0.01 |
| 0.165 | 3.2 | 0.01 | 4.1 | 0.01 | 4.9 | 0.01 | 1.6 | 0.00 | 2.5 | 0.00 | 7.1 | 0.01 |
| 0.289 | 1.7 | 0.00 | 2.3 | 0.01 | 4.3 | 0.01 | 1.4 | 0.00 | 2.0 | 0.01 | 5.1 | 0.01 |
| 0.393 | 1.6 | 0.01 | 1.9 | 0.01 | 4.4 | 0.02 | 1.5 | 0.01 | 3.3 | 0.00 | 5.1 | 0.02 |
| 0.418 | 2.0 | 0.01 | 1.8 | 0.01 | 3.8 | 0.02 | 0.5 | 0.00 | 1.7 | 0.01 | 4.7 | 0.02 |
Precision was assessed in serum samples with five different C1‐INH concentrations. Each sample was assayed in duplicate, with two runs per day over 21 days—giving a total of 84 readings per sample. This part of the study was carried out using three reagent lots and five different analyzers.
Interference data for automated Optilite® C1‐INH assay
| Chyle | Bilirubin | Hemoglobin | Triglyceride | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | 1.6% | 8.9% | 4.3% | −3.5% |
| MDP | 3.1% | 0.9% | 6.2% | −1.7% |
| Normal range | 1.3% | 1.0% | 3.5% | −1.5% |
Serum samples with three different C1‐INH concentrations (one low concentration, one around the medical decision point (MDP) and one within the normal range) were spiked with one of four interferents or saline as a control. All samples were then run in the Optilite C1‐INH assay. The results represent percentage change observed in the presence of the interfering substance.
Figure 3Comparison of C1‐INH concentration by Optilite and RID. The C1‐INH concentration was measured using the Optilite assay, and compared to the radial immunodiffusion (RID) method used routinely in the clinical laboratory. Two hundred and sixty serum samples from patients with, or undergoing investigation for angioedema were used. Comparison between the two assays was assessed using A, Passing‐Bablok analysis (identity line shown where y = x) and B, Bland‐Altman analysis (solid line demonstrates the mean difference and broken lines show the limits of agreement, −1.96 and +1.96 standard deviations)
Figure 4Correlation between C1‐INH concentration and C1‐INH functional activity. C1‐INH concentration and functional activity were measured in serum samples (n = 199, samples with C1‐INH function over the range of the assay (>140%) of the normal control were removed from this analysis). ▴ = 3 Type II hereditary angioedema (HAE) samples, ● = all other samples (Type I HAE, acquired angioedema (AAE), and unspecified angioedema [UAE]). Results were analyzed using linear regression analysis
Figure 5C1‐INH concentration and C1‐INH functional activity in clinical samples. The C1‐INH concentrations were measured using the Optilite assay (A) and radial immunodiffusion (RID, B). The functional activity of C1‐INH is also shown (C). Shaded areas represent the normal range of the assays