Suppr超能文献

细胞因子标志物高敏免疫分析技术的跨平台比较:创伤后应激障碍和帕金森病中的平台性能

Cross-platform comparison of highly sensitive immunoassay technologies for cytokine markers: Platform performance in post-traumatic stress disorder and Parkinson's disease.

作者信息

Lasseter Heather C, Provost Allison C, Chaby Lauren E, Daskalakis Nikolaos P, Haas Magali, Jeromin Andreas

机构信息

Cohen Veterans Bioscience Inc., 535 8th Avenue, 12th Floor, New York, NY 10018, United States.

出版信息

Cytokine X. 2020 Apr 28;2(2):100027. doi: 10.1016/j.cytox.2020.100027. eCollection 2020 Jun.

Abstract

There is mounting evidence of systemic inflammation in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and Parkinson's disease (PD), yet inconsistency and a lack of replicability in findings of putative biological markers have delayed progress in this space. Variability in performance between platforms may contribute to the lack of consensus in the biomarker literature, as has been seen for a number of psychiatric disorders, including PTSD. Thus, there is a need for high-performance, scalable, and validated platforms for the discovery and development of biomarkers of inflammation for use in drug development and as clinical diagnostics. To identify the best platform for use in future biomarker discovery efforts, we conducted a comprehensive cross-platform and cross-assay evaluation across five leading platform technologies. This initial assessment focused on four cytokines that have been implicated PTSD - interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, and interferon (IFN)-γ. To assess platform performance and understand likely measurements in individuals with brain disorders, serum and plasma samples were obtained from individuals with PTSD (n = 13) or Parkinson's Disease (n = 14) as well as healthy controls (n = 5). We compared platform performance across a number of common analytic parameters, including assay precision, sensitivity, frequency of endogenous analyte detection (FEAD), correlation between platforms, and parallelism in measurement of cytokines using a serial dilution series. The single molecule array (Simoa™) ultra-sensitive platform (Quanterix), MESO V-Plex (Mesoscale Discovery), and Luminex xMAP® (Myriad) were conducted by their respective vendors, while Luminex® and Quantikine® high-sensitivity ELISA assays were evaluated by R&D System's Biomarker Testing Services. The assay with the highest sensitivity in detecting endogenous analytes across all analytes and clinical populations (i.e. the highest FEAD), was the Simoa™ platform. In contrast, more variable performance was observed for MESO V-plex, R&D Luminex® and Quantikine®, while Myriad's Luminex xMAP® exhibited low FEAD across all analytes and samples. Simoa™ also demonstrated high precision in detecting endogenous cytokines, as reflected in < 20 percent coefficient of variance (%CV) across replicate runs for samples from the healthy controls, PTSD patients, and PD patients. In contrast, MESO V-Plex, R&D Luminex® and Quantikine® had variable performance in terms of precision across cytokines. Myriad Luminex xMAP® could not be included in precision estimates because the vendor did not run samples in duplicate. For cross-platform performance comparisons, the highest cross-platform correlations were observed for IL-6 such that all platforms - except for Myriad's Luminex xMAP® - had strong correlations with one another in measurements of IL-6 (r range = 0.59 - 0.86). For the other cytokines, there was low to no correlation across platforms, such that reported measurements of IL-1β, TNF-α, and IFN-γ varied across assays. Taken together, these findings provide novel evidence that the choice of immunoassay could greatly impact reported cytokine findings. The current study provides crucial information on the variability in performance between platforms and across immunoassays that may help inform the selection of assay in future research studies. Further, the results emphasize the need for performing comparative evaluations of immunoassays as new technologies emerge over time, particularly given the lack of reference standards for the quantitative assessments of cytokines.

摘要

越来越多的证据表明创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)和帕金森病(PD)存在全身炎症,但假定生物标志物的研究结果存在不一致性且缺乏可重复性,这延缓了该领域的进展。平台之间性能的差异可能导致生物标志物文献缺乏共识,正如在包括PTSD在内的许多精神疾病中所看到的那样。因此,需要高性能、可扩展且经过验证的平台来发现和开发用于药物开发及临床诊断的炎症生物标志物。为了确定未来生物标志物发现工作中使用的最佳平台,我们对五种领先的平台技术进行了全面的跨平台和跨检测评估。这项初步评估聚焦于四种与PTSD相关的细胞因子——白细胞介素(IL)-1β、IL-6、肿瘤坏死因子(TNF)-α和干扰素(IFN)-γ。为了评估平台性能并了解脑部疾病患者可能的检测结果,我们从PTSD患者(n = 13)、帕金森病患者(n = 14)以及健康对照者(n = 5)中获取了血清和血浆样本。我们比较了多个常见分析参数的平台性能,包括检测精密度、灵敏度、内源性分析物检测频率(FEAD)、平台间的相关性以及使用系列稀释法测量细胞因子时的平行性。单分子阵列(Simoa™)超灵敏平台(Quanterix公司)、MESO V-Plex(Mesoscale Discovery公司)和Luminex xMAP®(Myriad公司)由各自的供应商进行检测,而Luminex®和Quantikine®高灵敏度ELISA检测由R&D System公司的生物标志物检测服务部门进行评估。在所有分析物和临床群体中检测内源性分析物灵敏度最高(即FEAD最高)的检测方法是Simoa™平台。相比之下,MESO V-plex、R&D Luminex®和Quantikine®的性能变化更大,而Myriad公司的Luminex xMAP®在所有分析物和样本中的FEAD较低。Simoa™在检测内源性细胞因子方面也表现出高精度,健康对照者、PTSD患者和PD患者样本重复检测的变异系数(%CV)均小于20%。相比之下,MESO V-Plex、R&D Luminex®和Quantikine®在细胞因子检测精度方面表现不一。Myriad Luminex xMAP®无法纳入精度评估,因为供应商未对样本进行重复检测。对于跨平台性能比较,IL-6的跨平台相关性最高,以至于除了Myriad公司的Luminex xMAP®之外,所有平台在IL-6测量方面彼此之间都有很强的相关性(r范围 = 0.59 - 0.86)。对于其他细胞因子,平台间的相关性较低或几乎没有相关性,以至于不同检测方法报告的IL-1β、TNF-α和IFN-γ测量值各不相同。综上所述,这些发现提供了新的证据,表明免疫检测方法的选择可能会极大地影响所报告的细胞因子检测结果。当前研究提供了关于平台之间以及不同免疫检测方法性能差异的关键信息,这可能有助于为未来研究中检测方法的选择提供参考。此外,结果强调随着时间推移新技术不断涌现,需要对免疫检测方法进行比较评估,特别是考虑到细胞因子定量评估缺乏参考标准的情况。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3e80/7885879/3d8c05c63360/gr1.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