Suppr超能文献

新型自动化化学发光免疫分析方法QUANTA Flash CTD Screen Plus的临床性能评估

Clinical performance evaluation of a novel, automated chemiluminescent immunoassay, QUANTA Flash CTD Screen Plus.

作者信息

Bentow Chelsea, Lakos Gabriella, Rosenblum Rachel, Bryant Cassandra, Seaman Andrea, Mahler Michael

机构信息

Inova Diagnostics, Inc., 9900 Old Grove Road, San Diego, CA, 92131-1638, USA,

出版信息

Immunol Res. 2015 Feb;61(1-2):110-6. doi: 10.1007/s12026-014-8601-5.

Abstract

The QUANTA Flash(®) CTD Screen Plus is a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA) for the detection of the major antinuclear antibodies (ANA) on the BIO-FLASH(®) platform. NOVA View(®) is an automated fluorescence microscope that acquires digital images of indirect immunofluorescent assay (IFA) slides. Our goal was to evaluate the clinical performance of the two automated systems and compare their performance to that of traditional IFA. Sera from patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARD, n = 178), along with disease and healthy controls (n = 204), were tested with the CTD CIA and with NOVA Lite(®) HEp-2 ANA, using both the manual method of reading the IFA slides and the NOVA View instrument. The CTD CIA showed 78.1% sensitivity for SARD, coupled with 94.1% specificity. Manual IFA and NOVA View showed somewhat higher sensitivity (81.5 and 84.8% in SARD, respectively), but significantly lower specificity (79.4 and 64.7%, respectively). Both automated systems displayed somewhat different performance, due to the different principals of ANA detection: IFA with NOVA View digital image interpretation had higher sensitivity, while the CTD CIA showed higher specificity. With the added benefits of full automation, the new CTD CIA is an attractive alternative to traditional ANA screening.

摘要

QUANTA Flash(®) CTD Screen Plus是一种化学发光免疫分析法(CIA),用于在BIO-FLASH(®)平台上检测主要抗核抗体(ANA)。NOVA View(®)是一台自动荧光显微镜,可采集间接免疫荧光分析法(IFA)载玻片的数字图像。我们的目标是评估这两种自动化系统的临床性能,并将它们的性能与传统IFA的性能进行比较。使用CTD CIA以及NOVA Lite(®) HEp-2 ANA,采用人工读取IFA载玻片的方法和NOVA View仪器,对患有系统性自身免疫性风湿病(SARD,n = 178)的患者血清以及疾病和健康对照(n = 204)进行检测。CTD CIA对SARD的敏感性为78.1%,特异性为94.1%。人工IFA和NOVA View显示出略高的敏感性(SARD中分别为81.5%和84.8%),但特异性显著较低(分别为79.4%和64.7%)。由于ANA检测原理不同,这两种自动化系统表现出略有不同的性能:采用NOVA View数字图像判读的IFA具有较高的敏感性,而CTD CIA显示出较高的特异性。新的CTD CIA具有全自动化的额外优势,是传统ANA筛查的一个有吸引力的替代方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验