Kort Sheila A R, Martens Frans, Vanpoucke Hilde, van Duijnhoven Hans L, Blankenstein Marinus A
Endocrine Laboratory, Department of Clinical Chemistry, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Clin Chem. 2006 Aug;52(8):1568-74. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2006.069039. Epub 2006 Jun 8.
Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) assays have historically produced different results. Our aim was to investigate the comparability of assay results of selected commercially available assay methods designed to measure total, free, or complexed PSA (tPSA, fPSA, and cPSA).
We measured tPSA, fPSA, and cPSA in 70 samples and in the WHO PSA 96/670 reference preparation with 6 assays (Beckman-Coulter Access, Abbott ARCHITECT and AxSYM, Bayer Advia Centaur, DPC IMMULITE 2000, and Roche Modular Analytics E170). We also calculated the fPSA/tPSA ratio.
The mean deviations from the expected tPSA and fPSA values for the WHO 96/670 reference preparation were 0.37 (range, 0.01-1.32) and 0.19 (range, 0.05-0.49) microg/L, respectively. When plotted against the expected WHO 96/670 reference preparation value, regression slopes varied from 0.99 to 1.22 and r2 from 0.9996 to 1.000. When total PSA was measured in mixtures of sera with high and low tPSA concentrations, the mean (SD) slope of regression of different assays against an in-house method was 1.04 (0.09). In these specimens, the fPSA/tPSA ratio was 0.11-0.14 with different methods. The tPSA and fPSA values in patient samples measured in different assays and plotted against ARCHITECT gave regression slopes from 0.88 to 0.97. The results of the studied assays for tPSA in serum samples agreed within 15%, from each other, and all results for the WHO 96/670 reference preparation were within 6.8% (confidence interval, 1.7%-15.2%) of the expected value. The results for fPSA were more diverse.
Differences among PSA assays appear to have decreased since introduction of the WHO 96/670 reference preparation, but further efforts are needed to harmonize fPSA assays.
前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)检测历来会产生不同的结果。我们的目的是研究选定的旨在测量总PSA、游离PSA或复合PSA(tPSA、fPSA和cPSA)的市售检测方法的检测结果的可比性。
我们用6种检测方法(贝克曼库尔特Access、雅培ARCHITECT和AxSYM、拜耳Advia Centaur、DPC IMMULITE 2000和罗氏Modular Analytics E170)对70份样本以及WHO PSA 96/670参考制剂中的tPSA、fPSA和cPSA进行了检测。我们还计算了fPSA/tPSA比值。
WHO 96/670参考制剂的tPSA和fPSA预期值的平均偏差分别为0.37(范围为0.01 - 1.32)和0.19(范围为0.05 - 0.49)μg/L。与预期的WHO 96/670参考制剂值作图时,回归斜率在0.99至1.22之间,r2在0.9996至1.000之间。当在高tPSA浓度和低tPSA浓度的血清混合物中测量总PSA时,不同检测方法相对于内部方法的回归平均(标准差)斜率为1.04(0.09)。在这些样本中,不同方法测得的fPSA/tPSA比值为0.11 - 0.14。在不同检测方法中测量并与ARCHITECT作图的患者样本中的tPSA和fPSA值的回归斜率为0.88至0.97。所研究的血清样本中tPSA检测结果之间的差异在15%以内,WHO 96/670参考制剂的所有结果均在预期值的6.8%(置信区间为1.7% - 15.2%)以内。fPSA的结果差异更大。
自引入WHO 96/670参考制剂以来,PSA检测之间的差异似乎有所减小,但仍需要进一步努力使fPSA检测标准化。