Suppr超能文献

自动化与经验:脑脊液中阿尔茨海默病β-淀粉样蛋白1-42肽的检测

Automation vs. Experience: Measuring Alzheimer's Beta-Amyloid 1-42 Peptide in the CSF.

作者信息

Kollhoff Alexander L, Howell Jennifer C, Hu William T

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.

出版信息

Front Aging Neurosci. 2018 Aug 22;10:253. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2018.00253. eCollection 2018.

Abstract

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers can enhance the early and accurate etiologic detection of Alzheimer's disease (AD) even when symptoms are very mild, but are not yet widely available for clinical testing. There are a number of reasons for this, including the need for an experienced operator, the use of instruments mostly reserved for research, and low cost-effectiveness when patient samples do not completely fill each assay plate. Newer technology can overcome some of these issues through automated assays of a single patient sample on existing clinical laboratory platforms, but it is not known how these newer automated assays compare with previous research-based measurements. This is a critical issue in the clinical translation of CSF AD biomarkers because most cohort and clinicopathologic studies have been analyzed on older assays. To determine the correlation of CSF beta-amyloid 1-42 (Aβ42) measures derived from the automated chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA, on Lumipulse G1200), a bead-based Luminex immunoassay, and a plate-based enzyme-linked immunoassay enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), we analyzed 30 CSF samples weekly on each platforms over 3 weeks. We found that, while CSF Aβ42 levels were numerically closer between CLEIA and ELISA measurements, levels differed between all three assays. CLEIA-based measures correlated linearly with the two other assays in the low and intermediate Aβ42 concentrations, while there was a linear correlation between Luminex assay and ELISA throughout all concentrations. For repeatability, the average intra-assay coefficient of variation (CV) was 2.0%. For intermediate precision, the inter-assay CV was lower in CLEIA (7.1%) than Luminex (10.7%, = 0.009) and ELISA (10.8%, = 0.009), primarily due to improved intermediate precision in the higher CSF Aβ42 concentrations. We conclude that the automated CLEIA generated reproducible CSF Aβ42 measures with improved intermediate precision over experienced operators using Luminex assays and ELISA, and are highly correlated with the manual Aβ42 measures.

摘要

脑脊液(CSF)生物标志物即使在症状非常轻微时也能增强对阿尔茨海默病(AD)的早期和准确病因检测,但尚未广泛用于临床检测。原因有很多,包括需要经验丰富的操作人员、大多用于研究的仪器的使用,以及当患者样本未完全填满每个检测板时成本效益较低。更新的技术可以通过在现有临床实验室平台上对单个患者样本进行自动化检测来克服其中一些问题,但尚不清楚这些更新的自动化检测与以前基于研究的测量方法相比如何。这是脑脊液AD生物标志物临床转化中的一个关键问题,因为大多数队列研究和临床病理研究都是使用较旧的检测方法进行分析的。为了确定通过自动化化学发光酶免疫分析(CLEIA,在Lumipulse G1200上)、基于磁珠的Luminex免疫分析和基于平板的酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)得出的脑脊液β-淀粉样蛋白1-42(Aβ42)测量值之间的相关性,我们在3周内每周在每个平台上分析30个脑脊液样本。我们发现,虽然CLEIA和ELISA测量的脑脊液Aβ42水平在数值上更接近,但三种检测方法的水平存在差异。在低和中等Aβ42浓度下,基于CLEIA的测量值与其他两种检测方法呈线性相关,而在所有浓度下,Luminex检测与ELISA之间存在线性相关。对于重复性,平均批内变异系数(CV)为2.0%。对于中间精密度,CLEIA的批间CV(7.1%)低于Luminex(10.7%,P = 0.009)和ELISA(10.8%,P = 0.009),这主要是由于在较高的脑脊液Aβ42浓度下中间精密度有所提高。我们得出结论,自动化CLEIA生成的脑脊液Aβ42测量值具有可重复性,与使用Luminex检测和ELISA的经验丰富的操作人员相比,中间精密度有所提高,并且与手动Aβ42测量值高度相关。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1ecb/6113375/96227129a830/fnagi-10-00253-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