Kozaki Tomoaki, Lee Soomin, Nishimura Takayuki, Katsuura Tetsuo, Yasukouchi Akira
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, 6-21-1 Nagao, Tama-ku, Kawasaki 214-8585, Japan.
J Circadian Rhythms. 2011 Jan 10;9(1):1. doi: 10.1186/1740-3391-9-1.
Although various acceptable and easy-to-use devices have been used for saliva collection, cotton swabs are among the most common ones. Previous studies reported that cotton swabs yield a lower level of melatonin detection. However, this statistical method is not adequate for detecting an agreement between cotton saliva collection and passive saliva collection, and a test for bias is needed. Furthermore, the effects of cotton swabs have not been examined at lower melatonin level, a level at which melatonin is used for assessment of circadian rhythms, namely dim light melatonin onset (DLMO). In the present study, we estimated the effect of cotton swabs on the results of salivary melatonin assay using the Bland-Altman plot at lower level.
Nine healthy males were recruited and each provided four saliva samples on a single day to yield a total of 36 samples. Saliva samples were directly collected in plastic tubes using plastic straws, and subsequently pipetted onto cotton swabs (cotton saliva collection) and into clear sterile tubes (passive saliva collection). The melatonin levels were analyzed in duplicate using commercially available ELISA kits.
The mean melatonin concentration in cotton saliva collection samples was significantly lower than that in passive saliva collection samples at higher melatonin level (>6 pg/mL). The Bland-Altman plot indicated that cotton swabs causes relative and proportional biases in the assay results. For lower melatonin level (<6 pg/mL), although the BA plots didn't show proportional and relative biases, there was no significant correlation between passive and cotton saliva collection samples.
Our findings indicate an interference effect of cotton swabs on the assay result of salivary melatonin at lower melatonin level. Cotton-based collection devices might, thus, not be suitable for assessment of DLMO.
尽管已经使用了各种可接受且易于使用的设备来收集唾液,但棉签是最常用的设备之一。先前的研究报告称,棉签检测到的褪黑素水平较低。然而,这种统计方法不足以检测棉签唾液采集和被动唾液采集之间的一致性,因此需要进行偏差测试。此外,尚未在较低的褪黑素水平下研究棉签的影响,而在该水平下褪黑素用于评估昼夜节律,即暗光褪黑素起始(DLMO)。在本研究中,我们使用Bland-Altman图在较低水平下估计了棉签对唾液褪黑素测定结果的影响。
招募了9名健康男性,每人在一天内提供4份唾液样本,共获得36份样本。使用塑料吸管将唾液样本直接收集到塑料管中,随后吸取到棉签上(棉签唾液采集)和无菌透明管中(被动唾液采集)。使用市售ELISA试剂盒对褪黑素水平进行双份分析。
在较高的褪黑素水平(>6 pg/mL)下,棉签唾液采集样本中的褪黑素平均浓度显著低于被动唾液采集样本中的浓度。Bland-Altman图表明,棉签在测定结果中导致相对和比例偏差。对于较低的褪黑素水平(<6 pg/mL),尽管Bland-Altman图未显示比例和相对偏差,但被动唾液采集样本和棉签唾液采集样本之间没有显著相关性。
我们的研究结果表明,在较低的褪黑素水平下,棉签对唾液褪黑素测定结果有干扰作用。因此,基于棉花的采集设备可能不适用于DLMO的评估。