Kevin McKinski, Huaping Tang, Kai Wang, Mary Birchler, Mike Wright
{"title":"Comparison of highly sensitive, multiplex immunoassay platforms for streamlined clinical cytokine quantification.","authors":"Kevin McKinski, Huaping Tang, Kai Wang, Mary Birchler, Mike Wright","doi":"10.1080/17576180.2024.2442190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Selecting the optimal platforms to quantitate cytokines is challenging due to varying performance and the plethora of options available.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To compare performance of three highly sensitive, multiplex assays on three different platforms - MSD S-plex, Olink Target 48, and Quanterix SP-X - to MSD V-plex which is widely used for quantitative cytokine assay.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Serum and stimulated plasma samples were analyzed across each platform. The proportion of quantifiable samples was compared for each analyte and correlation analyses were performed to relate the data. For MSD S-plex, parallelism and antibody pair knockdown experiments gauged specificity of the kit.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>MSD S-plex was the most sensitive multiplex platform followed by Olink Target 48, Quanterix SP-X, and MSD V-plex. Concentrations across platforms differed greatly for some cytokines, but all platforms showed strong correlation. Results for MSD S-plex were confirmed by parallelism and knockdown.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>MSD S-plex should be a priority platform for ultra-sensitive assay. Olink Target 48 offers an enticing combination of sensitivity and multiplex capability that warrants consideration when many cytokines require quantitation. MSD V-plex, MSD S-plex and Olink quantitative assays offer high utility across drug development programs, but fit-for-purpose performance should be assessed on a per-analyte basis.</p>","PeriodicalId":8797,"journal":{"name":"Bioanalysis","volume":" ","pages":"17-29"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11749433/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioanalysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17576180.2024.2442190","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Selecting the optimal platforms to quantitate cytokines is challenging due to varying performance and the plethora of options available.
Aims: To compare performance of three highly sensitive, multiplex assays on three different platforms - MSD S-plex, Olink Target 48, and Quanterix SP-X - to MSD V-plex which is widely used for quantitative cytokine assay.
Methods: Serum and stimulated plasma samples were analyzed across each platform. The proportion of quantifiable samples was compared for each analyte and correlation analyses were performed to relate the data. For MSD S-plex, parallelism and antibody pair knockdown experiments gauged specificity of the kit.
Results: MSD S-plex was the most sensitive multiplex platform followed by Olink Target 48, Quanterix SP-X, and MSD V-plex. Concentrations across platforms differed greatly for some cytokines, but all platforms showed strong correlation. Results for MSD S-plex were confirmed by parallelism and knockdown.
Conclusion: MSD S-plex should be a priority platform for ultra-sensitive assay. Olink Target 48 offers an enticing combination of sensitivity and multiplex capability that warrants consideration when many cytokines require quantitation. MSD V-plex, MSD S-plex and Olink quantitative assays offer high utility across drug development programs, but fit-for-purpose performance should be assessed on a per-analyte basis.
BioanalysisBIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS-CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
88
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍:
Reliable data obtained from selective, sensitive and reproducible analysis of xenobiotics and biotics in biological samples is a fundamental and crucial part of every successful drug development program. The same principles can also apply to many other areas of research such as forensic science, toxicology and sports doping testing.
The bioanalytical field incorporates sophisticated techniques linking sample preparation and advanced separations with MS and NMR detection systems, automation and robotics. Standards set by regulatory bodies regarding method development and validation increasingly define the boundaries between speed and quality.
Bioanalysis is a progressive discipline for which the future holds many exciting opportunities to further reduce sample volumes, analysis cost and environmental impact, as well as to improve sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, efficiency, assay throughput, data quality, data handling and processing.
The journal Bioanalysis focuses on the techniques and methods used for the detection or quantitative study of analytes in human or animal biological samples. Bioanalysis encourages the submission of articles describing forward-looking applications, including biosensors, microfluidics, miniaturized analytical devices, and new hyphenated and multi-dimensional techniques.
Bioanalysis delivers essential information in concise, at-a-glance article formats. Key advances in the field are reported and analyzed by international experts, providing an authoritative but accessible forum for the modern bioanalyst.