Suppr超能文献

使用鲎试剂法和酶免疫分析法测定家庭灰尘样本中的β-(1,3)-葡聚糖:一项实验室间比较。

Measurement of β-(1,3)-glucan in household dust samples using Limulus amebocyte assay and enzyme immunoassays: an inter-laboratory comparison.

作者信息

Brooks Collin R, Siebers Rob, Crane Julian, Noss Ilka, Wouters Inge M, Sander Ingrid, Raulf-Heimsoth Monika, Thorne Peter S, Metwali Nervana, Douwes Jeroen

机构信息

Centre for Public Health Research, Massey University Wellington Campus, Wellington, New Zealand.

出版信息

Environ Sci Process Impacts. 2013 Feb;15(2):405-11. doi: 10.1039/c2em30749a. Epub 2012 Dec 5.

Abstract

Environmental levels of β-(1,3)-glucan, an inflammatory fungal cell wall component, have been suggested to be related to respiratory symptoms. However there is currently little data comparing β-(1,3)-glucan detection methods and/or results obtained in different laboratories. The aim of this study was to compare levels of β-(1,3)-glucans detected in household dust samples (n = 40) using different extraction/detection methods (Limulus amebocyte assay (LAL), inhibition enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and sandwich EIA) in five different laboratories. Dust sample aliquots were sent to participating centres, extracted and analysed for β-(1,3)-glucan according to standard in-house procedures. Significant differences in the levels of β-(1,3)-glucan were observed between all laboratories (geometric mean levels ranging from 15.4 μg g (-1) to 4754 μg g(-1) dust; p < 0.0001) with the exception of those using a similar LAL method. The inhibition EIA used in laboratory D produced mean β-(1,3)-glucan measurements 80-100 times higher than the LAL assays, 4 times higher than the sandwich EIA in the same lab, 17.6 times those obtained with the EIA in lab E and 363 times those obtained in the EIA in laboratory C. Pearson's correlations generally showed significant associations between methods and laboratories, particularly those using similar methodology (R ranging from 0.5 to 0.8; p < 0.001), although some poor and even inverse correlations were observed. Bland-Altman analyses showed moderate to good agreement between most assays, although clear absolute differences were observed. In conclusion, although results obtained with different methods were often significantly correlated and therefore comparable in relative terms, direct comparison of results between laboratories and assays may be inappropriate.

摘要

炎症性真菌细胞壁成分β-(1,3)-葡聚糖的环境水平已被认为与呼吸道症状有关。然而,目前几乎没有数据可用于比较不同实验室中β-(1,3)-葡聚糖的检测方法和/或检测结果。本研究的目的是比较五个不同实验室使用不同提取/检测方法(鲎试剂法(LAL)、抑制酶免疫测定法(EIA)和夹心EIA)在家庭灰尘样本(n = 40)中检测到的β-(1,3)-葡聚糖水平。将灰尘样本等分试样送至参与中心,按照内部标准程序进行提取并分析β-(1,3)-葡聚糖。除了使用类似LAL方法的实验室外,所有实验室之间观察到β-(1,3)-葡聚糖水平存在显著差异(几何平均水平范围为15.4 μg g⁻¹至4754 μg g⁻¹灰尘;p < 0.0001)。实验室D中使用的抑制EIA法测得的β-(1,3)-葡聚糖平均含量比LAL法高80 - 100倍,比同一实验室中的夹心EIA法高4倍,是实验室E中EIA法测得值的17.6倍,是实验室C中EIA法测得值的363倍。Pearson相关性分析通常显示方法与实验室之间存在显著关联,特别是那些使用类似方法的实验室(R范围为0.5至0.8;p < 0.001),尽管也观察到一些较差甚至相反的相关性。Bland-Altman分析表明大多数检测方法之间具有中度到良好的一致性,尽管观察到明显的绝对差异。总之,尽管不同方法获得的结果通常具有显著相关性,因此在相对意义上具有可比性,但直接比较不同实验室和检测方法之间的结果可能并不合适。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验