A Comparative Study of Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Point-of-Care-Testing (POCT) Techniques

A. Ajala, T. Adedeji, JS Busuyi
{"title":"A Comparative Study of Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Point-of-Care-Testing (POCT) Techniques","authors":"A. Ajala, T. Adedeji, JS Busuyi","doi":"10.30442/ahr.0901-05-189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) testing is widely used to diagnose and monitor clinical progress in patients with prostate cancer. The availability of various new Point-of-Care-Testing (POCT) equipment for PSA demands that the performance characteristics of these equipment be assessed before introducing them into clinical use to ensure accuracy and reliability.\nObjectives: To compare the i-CHROMA® automated immunofluorescence serum total PSA assay with the Accubind® Enzyme Linked Immuno-Sorbent Assay (ELISA) as POCT among patients with suspected prostate cancer.\nMethods: The study was conducted at the Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals Complex (OAUTHC), Ile-Ife, Nigeria. Blood samples drawn from 20 consecutively selected patients were analysed for PSA using the i-CHROMA® immunofluorescence kit once and with the Accubind® ELISA protocol twice.\nResults: The mean PSA using Accubind® ELISA was 12.9ng/ml, while it was 14.5ng/ml with the i-CHROMA® immunofluorescence assay. The bias between the two methods was 1.6ng/ml. The two methods had a good correlation: Passing Bablok regression equation was y = 1.264604x – 0.0300469, and the Spearman correlation coefficient between the two measurements was high (r = 0.956; Confidence Interval 0.889 - 0.983; p<0.0001). Agreement between the two methods was statistically satisfactory as the mean values of the samples fell within the 95% Confidence Interval of the differences on the Bland Altman plot.\nConclusion: The i-CHROMA® POCT assay showed good correlation and agreement with the well-known ELISA method. Therefore, the method is recommended for use in monitoring PSA in patients with prostatic cancer.","PeriodicalId":52960,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Health Research","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30442/ahr.0901-05-189","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

Background: Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) testing is widely used to diagnose and monitor clinical progress in patients with prostate cancer. The availability of various new Point-of-Care-Testing (POCT) equipment for PSA demands that the performance characteristics of these equipment be assessed before introducing them into clinical use to ensure accuracy and reliability. Objectives: To compare the i-CHROMA® automated immunofluorescence serum total PSA assay with the Accubind® Enzyme Linked Immuno-Sorbent Assay (ELISA) as POCT among patients with suspected prostate cancer. Methods: The study was conducted at the Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals Complex (OAUTHC), Ile-Ife, Nigeria. Blood samples drawn from 20 consecutively selected patients were analysed for PSA using the i-CHROMA® immunofluorescence kit once and with the Accubind® ELISA protocol twice. Results: The mean PSA using Accubind® ELISA was 12.9ng/ml, while it was 14.5ng/ml with the i-CHROMA® immunofluorescence assay. The bias between the two methods was 1.6ng/ml. The two methods had a good correlation: Passing Bablok regression equation was y = 1.264604x – 0.0300469, and the Spearman correlation coefficient between the two measurements was high (r = 0.956; Confidence Interval 0.889 - 0.983; p<0.0001). Agreement between the two methods was statistically satisfactory as the mean values of the samples fell within the 95% Confidence Interval of the differences on the Bland Altman plot. Conclusion: The i-CHROMA® POCT assay showed good correlation and agreement with the well-known ELISA method. Therefore, the method is recommended for use in monitoring PSA in patients with prostatic cancer.
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
前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)护理点检测(POCT)技术的比较研究
背景:前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)检测广泛用于诊断和监测癌症患者的临床进展。PSA的各种新型护理点测试(POCT)设备的可用性要求在将其引入临床使用之前对这些设备的性能特征进行评估,以确保准确性和可靠性。目的:比较i-CHROMA®自动免疫荧光血清总PSA测定法与Accubind®酶联免疫吸附测定法(ELISA)作为POCT在疑似前列腺癌症患者中的应用。方法:该研究在尼日利亚伊菲岛奥巴菲米·阿沃洛沃大学教学医院综合楼(OAUTHC)进行。使用i-CHROMA®免疫荧光试剂盒分析20名连续选择的患者的血样一次,使用Accubind®ELISA方案分析两次PSA。结果:使用Accubind®ELISA的平均PSA为12.9ng/ml,而使用i-CHROMA®免疫荧光测定的PSA为14.5ng/ml。两种方法之间的偏差为1.6ng/ml。两种方法具有良好的相关性:通过Bablok回归方程为y=1.264604x–0.0300469,两种测量之间的Spearman相关系数较高(r=0.956;置信区间0.889-0.983;p<0.0001)。两种方法之间的一致性在统计学上是令人满意的,因为样本的平均值在Bland-Altman图上差异的95%置信区间内。结论:i-CHROMA®POCT法与ELISA法具有良好的相关性和一致性。因此,推荐该方法用于癌症前列腺癌PSA的监测。
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
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Sonographic Correlations between Intravesical Prostatic Protrusion and Bladder Outlet Obstruction in Patients with Symptomatic Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia in Ibadan, Nigeria Medication Adherence, Barriers to Adherence and Treatment Satisfaction with Antiretroviral Therapy Among Adolescents Living with HIV in Lagos, Nigeria Diabetes-Related-Distress and its Relationship with Glycaemic Control Among Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients Attending a Specialty Clinic in Lagos, Nigeria Experiences of Professional Autonomy Among Critical Care Nurses in Kenya: A Qualitative Study Decision-to-Delivery Interval and Obstetric Outcomes of Emergency Caesarean Sections in a Nigerian Teaching Hospital
×
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