| Literature DB >> 31856626 |
Yizhuang Cheng1, Jing He1, Liping Zhang1, Xiufa Chen2, Saiying Ou2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a newly developed Hybiome ProGRP chemiluminescent assay.Entities:
Keywords: NSCLC; Pro-gastrin-releasing peptide (ProGRP); SCLC; chemiluminescent immunoassay; complement interference; equivalency
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31856626 PMCID: PMC7607052 DOI: 10.1177/0300060519882802
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Int Med Res ISSN: 0300-0605 Impact factor: 1.671
Figure 1.Format of the Hybiome ProGRP assay.
Within-run and total precision of the Hybiome ProGRP assay.
| Sample | Test number | Average concentration | Within-run | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (pg/mL) | SD | CV (%) | SD | CV (%) | ||
| Quality control 1 | 80 | 45.67 | 3.3 | 3.2 | 4.2 | 4.7 |
| Quality control 2 | 80 | 235.46 | 16.8 | 2.8 | 21.5 | 4.3 |
| Quality control 3 | 80 | 1858.32 | 22.9 | 2.9 | 25.7 | 4.6 |
| Calibrator 1 | 80 | 49.57 | 3.2 | 3.5 | 3.4 | 5.2 |
| Calibrator 2 | 80 | 1254.31 | 12.8 | 2.2 | 16.5 | 4.3 |
ProGRP, pro-gastrin-releasing peptide; SD, standard deviation; CV, coefficient of variation.
Recovery of ProGRP in spiked serum.
| Specimens | Specimen concentration | Recovery (%) | Average recovery(%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Spiked ProGRP concentration | ||||
| (pg/mL) | 50 pg/mL | 100 pg/mL | ||
| Serum-1 | 22 | 94.5 | 93.5 | 96.16 |
| Serum-2 | 35 | 103.3 | 92.2 | |
| Serum-3 | 26 | 93.8 | 90.6 | |
| Serum-4 | 41 | 96.5 | 93.6 | |
| Serum-5 | 28 | 105.2 | 98.4 | |
ProGRP, pro-gastrin-releasing peptide.
Figure 2.Correlation of ProGRP levels between the paired serum and EDTA plasma samples.
Figure 3.Serum stability at 2 to 8°C and complement interference. Each of the 25 fresh normal serum samples were spiked with a certain amount of high-level ProGRP serum, which was aliquoted and stored at 2 to 8 °C. One aliquot was analyzed from day 0 to day 4. Values of the spiked serum that was measured on different days were compared using a paired t-test, and all results were not statistically significant.
Figure 4.Correlation between the Roche Elecsys and Hybiome ProGRP assays.
Distribution of ProGRP levels in healthy controls, NSCLC, SCLC, and patients with benign lung diseases using the Roche and Hybiome assays.
| Patient type | Number | Assay | Median | Range | 95th percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| pg/mL | |||||
| Healthy | 162 | Roche | 32 | 7–157 | 83.94 |
| Hybiome | 36.85 | 12.36–168 | 94.43 | ||
| NSCLC | 65 | Roche | 44.5 | 7.1–244.6 | 127.95 |
| Hybiome | 40.9 | 4.9–231 | 122.63 | ||
| SCLC | 38 | Roche | 229 | 22–11205 | 5806.9 |
| Hybiome | 272.5 | 33–11134 | 5754.4 | ||
| Benign lung diseases | 53 | Roche | 53.8 | 33.2–102.4 | 95.26 |
| Hybiome | 53.1 | 28–167.5 | 102.36 | ||
ProGRP, pro-gastrin-releasing peptide; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; SCLC, small cell lung cancer (SCLC).
Figure 5.ProGRP ROC curves for SCLC (n = 38) compared with NSCLC (n = 65) for Roche and Hybiome assays.