Suppr超能文献

PROTIA™ Allergy-Q® 系统在过敏原特异性 IgE 检测中的性能:与 ImmunoCAP® 系统的比较。

Performance of the PROTIA™ Allergy-Q® System in the Detection of Allergen-specific IgE: A Comparison With the ImmunoCAP® System.

机构信息

Division of Allergy and Immunology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Institute of Allergy, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

Allergy Asthma Immunol Res. 2015 Nov;7(6):565-72. doi: 10.4168/aair.2015.7.6.565. Epub 2015 May 26.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The PROTIA™ Allergy-Q® enzyme immunoassay (EIA) is a recently developed screening assay for specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) for multiple allergens. The ImmunoCAP® fluorescent EIA (FEIA) system is the most widely used method for sIgE detection. In this study, we evaluated the performance of the Allergy-Q® system compared to the ImmunoCAP® system.

METHODS

We compared the 2 systems using sera from 260 Korean allergy patients suffering from asthma (26.5%), allergic rhinitis (42.3%), atopic dermatitis (67.7%), and food allergy (18.1%). We compared sIgE-measurement results for 7 inhalant allergens, 5 food allergens, and 4 microorganism allergens.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,799 paired assay results were analyzed. Except mugwort and alternaria, most of the allergen-sIgE results showed intra-class correlation coefficients of >0.5. Inter-assay class associations were reliable for most allergens (gamma=0.858-0.987, P<0.001). Passing-Bablok regression analysis showed multiple differences in intercept and slope. The inter-method concordance was moderate to substantial for most allergens (κ=0.713-0.898, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The PROTIA™ Allergy-Q® EIA system exhibited good detection performance compared to the ImmunoCAP® FEIA system in Korean allergic patients. However, because of methodological differences between the 2 assays, careful clinical implication is required for the interpretation of Allergy-Q® EIA results.

摘要

目的

PROTIA™ Allergy-Q® 酶联免疫吸附测定(EIA)是一种最近开发的用于多种过敏原的特异性免疫球蛋白 E(sIgE)的筛选检测方法。ImmunoCAP® 荧光 EIA(FEIA)系统是最广泛用于 sIgE 检测的方法。在这项研究中,我们评估了与 ImmunoCAP® 系统相比,Allergy-Q® 系统的性能。

方法

我们使用来自 260 名患有哮喘(26.5%)、过敏性鼻炎(42.3%)、特应性皮炎(67.7%)和食物过敏(18.1%)的韩国过敏患者的血清比较了这两种系统。我们比较了 7 种吸入性过敏原、5 种食物过敏原和 4 种微生物过敏原的 sIgE 测量结果。

结果

总体而言,分析了 1799 对配对检测结果。除了艾蒿和交链孢霉外,大多数过敏原-sIgE 结果的组内相关系数>0.5。大多数过敏原的组间关联是可靠的(γ=0.858-0.987,P<0.001)。Passing-Bablok 回归分析显示截距和斜率存在多种差异。大多数过敏原的两种方法之间的一致性为中度到高度(κ=0.713-0.898,P<0.001)。

结论

与 ImmunoCAP® FEIA 系统相比,PROTIA™ Allergy-Q® EIA 系统在韩国过敏患者中表现出良好的检测性能。然而,由于两种检测方法之间存在方法学差异,因此需要仔细考虑 Allergy-Q® EIA 结果的临床意义。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9424/4605929/b50993d8e42c/aair-7-565-g001.jpg

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