两种RIA试剂盒测定心房利钠肽(ANP)分析性能的评价与比较。

A Clerico, M G Del Chicca, G C Zucchelli, M Giganti, A Piffanelli
{"title":"两种RIA试剂盒测定心房利钠肽(ANP)分析性能的评价与比较。","authors":"A Clerico,&nbsp;M G Del Chicca,&nbsp;G C Zucchelli,&nbsp;M Giganti,&nbsp;A Piffanelli","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We evaluated the analytical performance of two commercial RIA kits for the assay of plasma atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), which use different antisera and tracers, in order to verify the most suitable RIA procedure for the assay of ANP in plasma samples. In particular, two different procedures for the purification of plasma were evaluated. The first one uses the extraction of plasma samples with Sep-Pack C18 cartridges and the second immunoextraction (C-terminal ANP-specific antibody bound to solid phase of Sepharose). The sensitivity and precision of the two RIA kits proved inadequate, being unable to provide an acceptably precise measurement of the plasma ANP concentrations in normal subjects. An improvement in precision and sensitivity was obtained by using \"fresh\" (or purified) preparations of the tracer and standard solutions, and by adding PEG to the B/F separation step. The direct assay (without preliminary purification) was not possible due to a serious overestimation of plasma levels due to the presence of interferences; on the other hand, the extraction step increased the imprecision and the complexity of the assay. Moreover, the extraction recovery of ANP added to plasma samples in the procedure using Sep-Pak cartridges is about 50-60%, while it was found to be almost complete (about 90%) in the immunoextraction procedure. Moreover, a comparison of the results obtained with the two RIA systems indicated that the antisera have comparable sensitivities, but quite different specificities; however, neither of the two RIA kits showed a completely satisfactory degree of sensitivity, precision and practicability.</p>","PeriodicalId":76654,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of nuclear medicine and allied sciences","volume":"34 2","pages":"81-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1990-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation and comparison of the analytical performances of two RIA kits for the assay of atrial natriuretic peptides (ANP).\",\"authors\":\"A Clerico,&nbsp;M G Del Chicca,&nbsp;G C Zucchelli,&nbsp;M Giganti,&nbsp;A Piffanelli\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We evaluated the analytical performance of two commercial RIA kits for the assay of plasma atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), which use different antisera and tracers, in order to verify the most suitable RIA procedure for the assay of ANP in plasma samples. In particular, two different procedures for the purification of plasma were evaluated. The first one uses the extraction of plasma samples with Sep-Pack C18 cartridges and the second immunoextraction (C-terminal ANP-specific antibody bound to solid phase of Sepharose). The sensitivity and precision of the two RIA kits proved inadequate, being unable to provide an acceptably precise measurement of the plasma ANP concentrations in normal subjects. An improvement in precision and sensitivity was obtained by using \\\"fresh\\\" (or purified) preparations of the tracer and standard solutions, and by adding PEG to the B/F separation step. The direct assay (without preliminary purification) was not possible due to a serious overestimation of plasma levels due to the presence of interferences; on the other hand, the extraction step increased the imprecision and the complexity of the assay. Moreover, the extraction recovery of ANP added to plasma samples in the procedure using Sep-Pak cartridges is about 50-60%, while it was found to be almost complete (about 90%) in the immunoextraction procedure. Moreover, a comparison of the results obtained with the two RIA systems indicated that the antisera have comparable sensitivities, but quite different specificities; however, neither of the two RIA kits showed a completely satisfactory degree of sensitivity, precision and practicability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":76654,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of nuclear medicine and allied sciences\",\"volume\":\"34 2\",\"pages\":\"81-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1990-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of nuclear medicine and allied sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of nuclear medicine and allied sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们评估了两种商用RIA试剂盒用于血浆心房钠素(ANP)测定的分析性能,这两种试剂盒使用不同的抗血清和示踪剂,以验证最合适的RIA程序用于血浆样品中ANP的测定。特别地,两种不同的纯化血浆的程序进行了评估。第一个是使用Sep-Pack C18试剂盒提取血浆样品,第二个是免疫提取(c端anp特异性抗体结合Sepharose固相)。两种RIA试剂盒的灵敏度和精度都不足够,无法提供正常受试者血浆ANP浓度的可接受的精确测量。通过使用“新鲜”(或纯化)的示踪剂和标准溶液,并在B/F分离步骤中添加PEG,可以提高精度和灵敏度。由于存在干扰导致血浆水平严重高估,直接测定(未经初步纯化)是不可能的;另一方面,提取步骤增加了测定的不精确性和复杂性。此外,在使用Sep-Pak试剂盒的过程中,添加到血浆样品中的ANP的提取回收率约为50-60%,而在免疫提取过程中发现它几乎完全(约90%)。此外,与两种RIA系统所得结果的比较表明,抗血清具有相当的敏感性,但特异性差异很大;然而,这两种RIA试剂盒都没有表现出完全令人满意的灵敏度、精度和实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation and comparison of the analytical performances of two RIA kits for the assay of atrial natriuretic peptides (ANP).

We evaluated the analytical performance of two commercial RIA kits for the assay of plasma atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), which use different antisera and tracers, in order to verify the most suitable RIA procedure for the assay of ANP in plasma samples. In particular, two different procedures for the purification of plasma were evaluated. The first one uses the extraction of plasma samples with Sep-Pack C18 cartridges and the second immunoextraction (C-terminal ANP-specific antibody bound to solid phase of Sepharose). The sensitivity and precision of the two RIA kits proved inadequate, being unable to provide an acceptably precise measurement of the plasma ANP concentrations in normal subjects. An improvement in precision and sensitivity was obtained by using "fresh" (or purified) preparations of the tracer and standard solutions, and by adding PEG to the B/F separation step. The direct assay (without preliminary purification) was not possible due to a serious overestimation of plasma levels due to the presence of interferences; on the other hand, the extraction step increased the imprecision and the complexity of the assay. Moreover, the extraction recovery of ANP added to plasma samples in the procedure using Sep-Pak cartridges is about 50-60%, while it was found to be almost complete (about 90%) in the immunoextraction procedure. Moreover, a comparison of the results obtained with the two RIA systems indicated that the antisera have comparable sensitivities, but quite different specificities; however, neither of the two RIA kits showed a completely satisfactory degree of sensitivity, precision and practicability.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
[Value of tumor marker positivity in germinal non-seminomatous tumors of the testis]. [Prostatic diseases: tumor markers (PAP and PSA) and age at risk]. [Tyrosine-phosphorylated proteins in human breast carcinoma]. Characterization of in vitro expressed human alpha-fetoprotein as highly reproducible reference material for clinical immunoassays. [TPA and TPS in the follow-up of cancer of the breast: preliminary evaluations].
×
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