Börmer O P
Central Laboratory, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo.
Clin Chem. 1991 Feb;37(2):231-6.
Four "sandwich"-type immunoassays for carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) based on monoclonal antibodies (Abbott CEA-RIA Monoclonal, Pharmacia/Wallac Delfia CEA kit, Roche CEA EIA Duomab 60, and our in-house immunoradiometric assay) were compared for 357 samples from colorectal cancer patients and samples from 48 patients with chronic liver disease or with acute, irrelevant diseases. Relative to a common 5 micrograms/L reference limit, all four assays agreed regarding classification in 92% to 94% of the samples in the colorectal cancer samples, with the Abbott and Roche assays giving slightly more "normal" values. Cross-testing of CEA standards and the 1st International Reference Preparation 73/601 showed that calibration differences could not be eliminated by the use of a common standard. It has been earlier demonstrated that the monoclonal antibodies in the Roche assay have an epitope group specificity slightly different from those of the other three assays. This can explain why the correlations involving the Roche assay were weaker (r = 0.84-0.87) than those obtained with the other assays (r = 0.94-0.97). I conclude that agreement between the assays studied is as good as can be expected when different antibodies are used; nevertheless, consistent discrepancies between assays in several patients still necessitate the use of the same assay during follow-up.
对来自结肠直肠癌患者的357份样本以及48例患有慢性肝病或急性无关疾病患者的样本,比较了四种基于单克隆抗体的癌胚抗原(CEA)“三明治”式免疫测定法(雅培CEA-RIA单克隆法、法玛西亚/瓦里安Delfia CEA试剂盒、罗氏CEA EIA Duomab 60以及我们内部的免疫放射测定法)。相对于5微克/升的通用参考限值,在结肠直肠癌样本中,92%至94%的样本在四种测定法的分类结果上是一致的,雅培和罗氏测定法给出的“正常”值略多。对CEA标准品和第一国际参考制剂73/601进行交叉检测表明,使用通用标准无法消除校准差异。此前已经证明,罗氏测定法中的单克隆抗体具有与其他三种测定法略有不同的表位组特异性。这可以解释为什么涉及罗氏测定法的相关性(r = 0.84 - 0.87)比其他测定法(r = 0.94 - 0.97)得到的相关性弱。我的结论是,当使用不同抗体时,所研究的测定法之间的一致性达到了预期的良好程度;然而,在一些患者中测定法之间持续存在的差异仍然使得在随访期间必须使用相同的测定法。