Proteomic biomarker evaluation using antibody microarrays: association between analytical methods such as microarray and ELISA.

Nadezhda G Gumanova, Natalya L Bogdanova, Victoria A Metelskaya
{"title":"Proteomic biomarker evaluation using antibody microarrays: association between analytical methods such as microarray and ELISA.","authors":"Nadezhda G Gumanova, Natalya L Bogdanova, Victoria A Metelskaya","doi":"10.1093/labmed/lmad083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the associations between analytical methods, such as microarray and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); expedient cutoffs; and the lowest possible number of microarrays in analysis for target biomarker estimation in case-control studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included 321 serum specimens, gathered in different case-control studies to test for atherosclerosis and atrial fibrillation. Among them, 48 serum specimens were analyzed using microarray technology. We used ELISA and commercial kits for confirmation of the results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three proteins-cadherin-P, neuronal nitric oxide synthase, and adenovirus fiber-were shown to have distinctly different values in the case group vs the control group. As a result, we used those proteins as the target for confirmation using our alternative analytical method. Also, these protein values represented the limiting range between the highest and lowest differences in case-control groups. The results of microarray assay were confirmed using ELISA and commercial kits in the same specimens, in which microarray profiling was performed, and also in separate large case-control groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A 1.5-fold difference in the protein content, as measured using microarray technology, was shown to be sufficient for further investigation of the candidate proteins. As few as 3 microarrays were considered sufficient for perspective evaluation of the target proteins. Microarray serum profiling, therefore, provides semiquantitative determination of protein in serum.</p>","PeriodicalId":17951,"journal":{"name":"Laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":"325-333"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmad083","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the associations between analytical methods, such as microarray and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); expedient cutoffs; and the lowest possible number of microarrays in analysis for target biomarker estimation in case-control studies.

Methods: This study included 321 serum specimens, gathered in different case-control studies to test for atherosclerosis and atrial fibrillation. Among them, 48 serum specimens were analyzed using microarray technology. We used ELISA and commercial kits for confirmation of the results.

Results: Three proteins-cadherin-P, neuronal nitric oxide synthase, and adenovirus fiber-were shown to have distinctly different values in the case group vs the control group. As a result, we used those proteins as the target for confirmation using our alternative analytical method. Also, these protein values represented the limiting range between the highest and lowest differences in case-control groups. The results of microarray assay were confirmed using ELISA and commercial kits in the same specimens, in which microarray profiling was performed, and also in separate large case-control groups.

Conclusions: A 1.5-fold difference in the protein content, as measured using microarray technology, was shown to be sufficient for further investigation of the candidate proteins. As few as 3 microarrays were considered sufficient for perspective evaluation of the target proteins. Microarray serum profiling, therefore, provides semiquantitative determination of protein in serum.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用抗体微阵列进行蛋白质组生物标志物评估:微阵列和 ELISA 等分析方法之间的关联。
目的评估微阵列和酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA)等分析方法、快速截断点以及病例对照研究中目标生物标记物估算分析中尽可能少的微阵列数量之间的关联:本研究包括 321 份血清标本,这些标本收集于不同的病例对照研究中,用于检测动脉粥样硬化和心房颤动。其中,48 份血清标本采用了微阵列技术进行分析。我们使用 ELISA 和商业试剂盒对结果进行了确认:结果:三种蛋白质--粘连蛋白-P、神经元一氧化氮合酶和腺病毒纤维--在病例组与对照组中的数值明显不同。因此,我们使用替代分析方法将这些蛋白质作为确认目标。此外,这些蛋白质值代表了病例对照组中最高和最低差异的极限范围。使用酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA)和商业试剂盒对进行了微阵列分析的相同标本以及单独的大型病例对照组的结果进行了确认:结论:使用芯片技术测量的蛋白质含量相差 1.5 倍,就足以对候选蛋白质进行进一步研究。只需 3 个芯片就足以对目标蛋白质进行透视评估。因此,芯片血清分析可对血清中的蛋白质进行半定量测定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Robert L. Schmidt, MD, PhD, MBA (November 17, 1952-October 25, 2023) A 6-year-old boy with an atypical liver neoplasm harboring a novel RPS6KA3 variant. Evaluating direct amplification from viral transport medium for SARS-CoV-2 detection, strain typing, and angiotensin-converting enzyme genotyping and expression assays. Diagnostic value of pleural effusion Krebs von den Lungen-6 in malignant pleural effusion of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Genetic analysis of TMPRSS6 catalytic domain variants in Mexican patients with iron treatment refractoriness.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1