Sillanaukee P, Löf K, Härlin A, Mårtensson O, Brandt R, Seppä K
Biomedical Research Center, Alko Ltd., Helsinki, Finland.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 1994 Oct;18(5):1150-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.1994.tb00096.x.
Different methods for detecting carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (CDT) were compared. In addition, their efficiency for detecting alcohol abuse among men not having clinical evidence of liver disease was studied in controls (n = 26), weekend (n = 16) and daily (n = 12) heavy drinkers, and alcoholics (n = 28). Comparisons were made between anion-exchange separation of iron-saturated transferrin (Tf) by microcolumns (CDTect) and by the Fast Protein Liquid Chromatography (FPLC% and FPLC-MG), followed by double-antibody radioimmunoassay of collected fractions. Tf fractions with pl > or = 5.7 were also measured by two different isoelectric focusing (IEF) methods, followed by immunofixation (SA-IEF-CDT and IEF-CDT-TOT), the latter method being used also for detection of asialotransferrin (IEF-CDT-AS). The cut-off was 20 units/liter for CDTect, 4.4% of total Tf for SA-IEF-CDT, and the mean +2 sd of the control group for FPLC-MG (as mg/liter of Tf), FPLC-%, IEF-CDT-TOT, and IEF-CDT-AS (all as percentage of Tf). The overall accuracies (combining sensitivity and specificity) for detecting heavy drinkers of CDTect, FPLO (mg/liter), FPLC (%), SA-IEF-CDT, IEF-CDT-TOT, and IEF-CDT-AS were 63%, 59%, 61%, 74%, 57%, and 63%, respectively; for detecting alcoholics, 87%, 83%, 81%, 89%, 37%, and 76%, respectively. In conclusion, the methods were in rather good agreement with each other. Diagnostic characteristics among heavy drinkers and correlations between methods differed slightly, probably depending on the ability of different methods to separate and detect asialo-, monosialo-, and disialotransferrin.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
对检测缺糖转铁蛋白(CDT)的不同方法进行了比较。此外,还在对照组(n = 26)、周末酗酒者(n = 16)、每日酗酒者(n = 12)和酗酒者(n = 28)中研究了这些方法在检测无肝病临床证据男性酒精滥用方面的效率。比较了通过微柱(CDTect)和快速蛋白质液相色谱法(FPLC%和FPLC-MG)对铁饱和转铁蛋白(Tf)进行阴离子交换分离,随后对收集的组分进行双抗体放射免疫测定的方法。还通过两种不同的等电聚焦(IEF)方法测量pI≥5.7的Tf组分,随后进行免疫固定(SA-IEF-CDT和IEF-CDT-TOT),后一种方法也用于检测去唾液酸转铁蛋白(IEF-CDT-AS)。CDTect的临界值为20单位/升,SA-IEF-CDT为总Tf的4.4%,FPLC-MG(以Tf毫克/升计)、FPLC-%、IEF-CDT-TOT和IEF-CDT-AS(均以Tf百分比计)为对照组均值 +2标准差。检测酗酒者时,CDTect、FPLO(毫克/升)、FPLC(%)、SA-IEF-CDT、IEF-CDT-TOT和IEF-CDT-AS的总体准确率(结合敏感性和特异性)分别为63%、59%、61%、74%、57%和63%;检测酗酒者时分别为87%、83%、81%、89%、37%和76%。总之,这些方法相互之间的一致性相当好。酗酒者中的诊断特征以及方法之间的相关性略有不同,可能取决于不同方法分离和检测去唾液酸、单唾液酸和双唾液酸转铁蛋白的能力。(摘要截短于250字)