| Literature DB >> 30214141 |
Hideki Miyake1, Naoto Mori1, Hidetoshi Mano1, Takahiro Imanaka1, Masatsugu Nakamura1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Reliable measurement of MUC5AC in human tears is essential for elucidation of the pathophysiological role of MUC5AC in dry eye disease. The purpose of this study was to develop a sensitive and reliable method for measurement of MUC5AC in human tear samples extracted from Schirmer strips by modifying a commercially available ELISA.Entities:
Keywords: MUC5AC; Schirmer test; assay; dry eye; mucin; tears
Year: 2018 PMID: 30214141 PMCID: PMC6120569 DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S170552
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Ophthalmol ISSN: 1177-5467
Figure 1Rates of extraction of MUC5AC and total protein in human tears from Schirmer strips.
Notes: Human tears were extracted from Schirmer strips using 600 µL of extraction solution for 1 hour. The graph shows the average of duplicate assays. The white (□) and black (■) columns show the extraction rates for MUC5AC and total protein, respectively.
Effects of polysorbate 20 on the OD values in a MUC5AC ELISA for human tear samples
| OD value | Polysorbate 20 concentration | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | 0.05% | 0.2% | 0.5% | |
| 0.945 | 1.052 | 0.963 | 0.865 | |
| 0.925 | 1.035 | 0.963 | 0.892 | |
| Mean | 0.935 | 1.044 | 0.963 | 0.879 |
Note: Ten microliters of pooled human tears and 600 µL of extraction solution with 0%, 0.05%, 0.2%, and 0.5% polysorbate 20 were mixed followed by measurement of MUC5AC.
Figure 2Effects of neuraminidase A concentration and reaction time on MUC5AC concentration in pooled human tear samples.
Note: The enzyme was incubated for 0, 1, and 2 hours in each tube and each well of an ELISA plate for 2 hours at 37°C.
Change in the signal/noise (S/N) ratio of absorbance with and without neuraminidase A treatment
| Tear lot No. | T5631
| T5701
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OD value | Mean OD value | S/N ratio | OD value | Mean OD value | S/N ratio | |
| Without neuraminidase | 0.4466 | 0.41255 | 1.13 | 0.3100 | 0.30485 | 0.83 |
| With neuraminidase | 3.4253 | 3.50375 | 9.57 | 3.4652 | 3.36465 | 9.19 |
Notes: The S/N ratio was calculated as the (sample OD value)/(extraction solution OD value). The extraction solution OD value was 0.3663.
Assessment of linearity of dilution with and without blocking treatment
| Tear lot No. | T5631
| T5701
| ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OD value | Concentration (pg/mL) | Dilution factor | Converted value (pg/mL) | Dilution ratio | OD value | Concentration (pg/mL) | Dilution factor | Converted value (pg/mL) | Dilution ratio | |
| Without blocking | 2.3327 | 1,330.7 | 60 | 79,843.0 | 1.00 | 2.3403 | 1,334.7 | 60 | 80,081.6 | 1.00 |
| 2.4078 | 1,369.6 | 120 | 164,353.0 | 2.06 | 2.4813 | 1,406.8 | 120 | 168,819.7 | 2.11 | |
| 2.2832 | 1,304.6 | 360 | 469,657.5 | 5.88 | 1.7355 | 990.0 | 360 | 356,389.3 | 4.45 | |
| 1.1715 | 621.2 | 1,080 | 670,849.3 | 8.40 | 0.9120 | 442.7 | 1,080 | 478,158.1 | 5.97 | |
| With block ace ×1 | 0.4959 | 135.0 | 60 | 8,102.6 | 1.00 | 0.3076 | 70.7 | 60 | 4,242.2 | 1.00 |
| 0.2801 | 61.9 | 120 | 7,429.5 | 0.92 | 0.1888 | 34.5 | 120 | 4,141.8 | 0.98 | |
| 0.2124 | 41.3 | 240 | 9,904.4 | 1.22 | 0.1405 | 21.9 | 240 | 5,259.9 | 1.24 | |
| 0.1819 | 32.6 | 480 | 15,647.4 | 1.93 | 0.1291 | 19.4 | 480 | 9,309.6 | 2.19 | |
| With block ace ×4 | 2.2888 | 853.4 | 60 | 51,206.1 | 1.00 | 1.4304 | 467.9 | 60 | 28,071.1 | 1.00 |
| 1.2207 | 380.5 | 120 | 45,657.4 | 0.89 | 0.6076 | 147.8 | 120 | 17,738.1 | 0.63 | |
| 0.6024 | 146.0 | 240 | 35,049.2 | 0.68 | 0.4528 | 96.9 | 240 | 23,256.3 | 0.83 | |
| 0.3956 | 79.3 | 480 | 38,087.8 | 0.74 | 0.2938 | 50.4 | 480 | 24,214.7 | 0.86 | |
Notes: The MUC5AC concentration was determined from the OD value using the calibration curve within the same analysis run. The converted value was calculated as the (concentration at corresponding dilution) × (dilution factor) and the dilution ratio as the (converted value)/(converted value at 60-fold). When the dilution ratio is close to 1, the linearity is good. Block ace ×1, stock block ace solution, block ace ×4, block ace solution that has been diluted by 4-fold.
Figure 3Assessment of linearity of dilution with and without blocking treatment.
Notes: A linear approximation line was applied to the plot with blocking. A smooth curve through each datum point was applied to the plot without blocking (singlicate, n=1). Block ace ×1, stock block ace solution, block ace ×4, block ace solution that has been diluted by 4-fold.
Calibration curve for the MUC5AC ELISA kit
| Day 1
| Day 2
| ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample (pg/mL) | OD value | Mean OD value | Calculated concentration (pg/mL) | RE (%) | Sample (pg/mL) | OD value | Mean OD value | Calculated concentration (pg/mL) | RE (%) |
| 1,250 | 2.6967 | 2.69245 | 1,246.3 | −0.3 | 1,250 | 3.0226 | 3.04515 | 1,241.6 | −0.7 |
| 2.6882 | 3.0677 | ||||||||
| 625 | 1.4581 | 1.47225 | 635.5 | 1.7 | 625 | 1.8444 | 1.84630 | 652.8 | 4.4 |
| 1.4864 | 1.8482 | ||||||||
| 312.5 | 0.7581 | 0.81935 | 312.3 | −0.1 | 312.5 | 1.0084 | 1.02435 | 289.3 | −7.4 |
| 0.8806 | 1.0403 | ||||||||
| 156.3 | 0.4701 | 0.47225 | 142.5 | −8.8 | 156.3 | 0.6740 | 0.67590 | 151.6 | −3.0 |
| 0.4744 | 0.6778 | ||||||||
| 78.1 | 0.3292 | 0.32575 | 71.8 | −8.1 | 78.1 | 0.4133 | 0.44565 | 69.9 | −10.5 |
| 0.3223 | 0.4780 | ||||||||
| 39.1 | 0.2816 | 0.26790 | 44.2 | 13.0 | 39.1 | 0.3502 | 0.33755 | 36.0 | −8.0 |
| 0.2542 | 0.3249 | ||||||||
| 19.5 | 0.2240 | 0.22385 | 23.4 | 20.2 | 19.5 | 0.2948 | 0.30740 | 27.4 | 40.3 |
| 0.2237 | 0.3200 | ||||||||
| 9.8 | 0.1856 | 0.17970 | – | – | 9.8 | 0.2625 | 0.28725 | – | – |
| 0.1738 | 0.3120 | ||||||||
| 0 | 0.2072 | 0.20380 | – | – | 0 | 0.2283 | 0.23085 | – | – |
| 0.2004 | 0.2334 | ||||||||
Note: The relative error (RE) values were calculated by fitting the curve to a four-parameter model in the range of 39.1–1,250 pg/mL with 19.5 pg/mL set as the anchor point.
Intra-assay and inter-assay precision and accuracy for the MUC5AC ELISA kit
| Day
| Day 1
| Day 2
| Day 3
| Inter-assay
| |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample (pg/mL) | Calculated concentration (pg/mL) | Mean (n=5) (pg/mL) | CV (n=5) (%) | RE (%) | Calculated concentration (pg/mL) | Mean (n=5) (pg/mL) | CV (n=5) (%) | RE (%) | Calculated concentration (pg/mL) | Mean (n=5) (pg/mL) | CV (n=5) (%) | RE (%) | Mean (n=15) (pg/mL) | CV (n=15) (%) | RE (%) |
| 39.1 | 31.2 | 37.5 | 16.6 | −4.1 | 36.2 | 35.8 | 0.9 | −8.5 | 32.2 | 34.1 | 7.1 | −12.8 | 35.8 | 10.8 | −8.5 |
| 31.4 | 35.4 | 31.5 | |||||||||||||
| 45.8 | 35.6 | 34.5 | |||||||||||||
| 40.3 | 36.0 | 34.7 | |||||||||||||
| 38.8 | 35.7 | 37.6 | |||||||||||||
| 100 | 83.4 | 90.3 | 4.6 | −9.7 | 93.0 | 98.6 | 7.7 | −1.4 | 94.4 | 105.3 | 12.2 | 5.3 | 98.1 | 10.7 | −1.9 |
| 90.5 | 101.2 | 102.9 | |||||||||||||
| 90.9 | 110.7 | 104.0 | |||||||||||||
| 92.0 | 95.4 | 98.0 | |||||||||||||
| 94.6 | 92.6 | 127.3 | |||||||||||||
| 1,000 | 1,054.0 | 977.8 | 5.9 | −2.2 | 945.0 | 941.0 | 6.9 | −5.9 | 1,062.0 | 1,037.3 | 2.6 | 3.7 | 985.3 | 6.4 | −1.5 |
| 921.7 | 1,051.7 | 1,036.4 | |||||||||||||
| 919.4 | 902.2 | 996.6 | |||||||||||||
| 1,001.4 | 911.1 | 1,031.8 | |||||||||||||
| 992.3 | 894.8 | 1,059.7 | |||||||||||||
| 1,250 | 1,211.9 | 1,176.2 | 5.2 | −5.9 | 1,086.7 | 1,087.9 | 3.0 | −13.0 | 1,261.0 | 1,256.1 | 2.6 | 0.5 | 1,173.4 | 7.0 | −6.1 |
| 1,231.7 | 1,084.2 | 1,295.9 | |||||||||||||
| 1,217.3 | 1,136.1 | 1,275.8 | |||||||||||||
| 1,104.7 | 1,089.9 | 1,228.3 | |||||||||||||
| 1,115.5 | 1,042.5 | 1,219.4 | |||||||||||||
Notes: Quality control samples (n=5) at concentrations of 39.1, 100, 1,000, and 1,250 pg/mL were assayed on 3 consecutive days. For inter-assay reproducibility, the coefficient of variation (CV) and relative error (RE) were evaluated using the data from days 1, 2, and 3.