Yeung G S, Kjarsgaard J C, Zlotkin S H
Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Toronto, Research Institute, The Hospital for Sick Children, ON, Canada.
Eur J Clin Nutr. 1998 Nov;52(11):801-4. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1600650.
To highlight differences in the quantification of transferrin receptor (TfR) concentration (a reliable index of iron deficiency) between three different assay methods.
Methods comparison of TfR measurements in 'elevated' and 'normal' human sera using the Ramco, Quantikine and 'Lab' assays.
The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Pooled TfR for elevated and normal human sera obtained from the Ramco TfR assay kit.
Differences between TfR concentrations in normal and elevated samples and repeatability for each assay method and limits of agreement in TfR quantification between assay methods.
The mean TfR concentrations for the elevated reference serum samples was higher than the normal reference samples within each individual assay (P < 0.001); however, measurement agreement between methods was poor.
Recognition of the relative differences in the values obtained from each of the assays should affect the interpretation of TfR concentration as an index of iron deficiency.
强调三种不同检测方法在转铁蛋白受体（TfR）浓度（缺铁的可靠指标）定量方面的差异。
使用Ramco、Quantikine和“实验室”检测方法对“升高”和“正常”人血清中的TfR测量值进行方法比较。
加拿大多伦多病童医院。
从Ramco TfR检测试剂盒获得的用于“升高”和“正常人血清”的混合TfR。
正常和升高样本中TfR浓度的差异、每种检测方法的重复性以及检测方法之间TfR定量的一致性界限。
在每种单独的检测中，升高的参考血清样本的平均TfR浓度高于正常参考样本（P < 0.001）；然而，各方法之间的测量一致性较差。
认识到每种检测所获得值的相对差异应会影响将TfR浓度作为缺铁指标的解释。
