Chuang J C, Pollard M A, Chou Y L, Menton R G, Wilson N K
Battelle, Columbus, OH 43201-2693, USA.
Sci Total Environ. 1998 Dec 11;224(1-3):189-99. doi: 10.1016/s0048-9697(98)00351-9.
Two commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) and carcinogenic PAH (C-PAH) were evaluated. The testing procedures were refined for application to screening PAH and C-PAH in house dust and soil samples for human exposure studies. The overall method precision expressed as percent relative standard deviation (%RSD) of triplicate real world dust and soil samples was within +/- 29% (12-29%) for PAH ELISA and +/- 21% (5.9-21%) for C-PAH ELISA. Spike recoveries from real world dust/soil samples were 114 +/- 30% for phenanthrene from PAH ELISA and 120 +/- 8.2% for benzo[a]pyrene from C-PAH ELISA. The overall method accuracy for PAH and C-PAH assays cannot be assessed for multiple PAH components in dust/soil samples (which represent real-world samples), because of the assays' cross reactivities with other PAH components. Over 100 dust/soil samples from 13 North Carolina homes and 22 Arizona homes were analyzed by PAH and C-PAH assays, as well as by the conventional gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) method. Statistical analysis showed that dust/soil PAH data from ELISA and GC/MS methods are significantly different. In general PAH ELISA responses were higher than PAH GC/MS responses. The regression analysis showed that the linear relationship between ELISA and GC/MS measurements is not strong in the combined data. The relationship became stronger for the data from the same type of dust/soil samples. The screening performance of ELISA was evaluated based on the frequency distribution of ELISA and GC/MS data. The results indicated that the ELISA PAH and C-PAH assays cannot be used as a quantitative analytical tool for determining PAH in real-world dust/soil samples. However, the ELISA is an effective screening tool for ranking PAH concentrations in similar types of real world dust/soil samples.
对两种市售的用于检测总多环芳烃（PAH）和致癌性多环芳烃（C-PAH）的酶联免疫吸附测定（ELISA）方法进行了评估。对检测程序进行了优化，以应用于筛查室内灰尘和土壤样本中的PAH和C-PAH，用于人体暴露研究。以三份实际灰尘和土壤样本的相对标准偏差百分比（%RSD）表示的总体方法精密度，PAH ELISA为±29%（12 - 29%），C-PAH ELISA为±21%（5.9 - 21%）。实际灰尘/土壤样本中菲的PAH ELISA加标回收率为114±30%，苯并[a]芘的C-PAH ELISA加标回收率为120±8.2%。由于这些测定与其他PAH成分存在交叉反应性，所以无法评估灰尘/土壤样本（代表实际样本）中多种PAH成分的PAH和C-PAH测定的总体方法准确性。通过PAH和C-PAH测定以及传统的气相色谱/质谱（GC/MS）方法，对来自北卡罗来纳州13个家庭和亚利桑那州22个家庭的100多个灰尘/土壤样本进行了分析。统计分析表明，ELISA和GC/MS方法得到的灰尘/土壤PAH数据存在显著差异。一般来说，PAH ELISA的响应高于PAH GC/MS的响应。回归分析表明，ELISA和GC/MS测量值之间的线性关系在合并数据中不强。对于来自同类型灰尘/土壤样本的数据，这种关系变得更强。基于ELISA和GC/MS数据的频率分布评估了ELISA的筛查性能。结果表明，ELISA的PAH和C-PAH测定不能用作测定实际灰尘/土壤样本中PAH的定量分析工具。然而，ELISA是对类似类型实际灰尘/土壤样本中PAH浓度进行排名的有效筛查工具。
