Amy Strydom, Doreen Jacob, Taryn Pillay, Refeletse Malahlela, Sean Currin
{"title":"在南非移植环境中通过质谱法和免疫测定法测量免疫抑制药物","authors":"Amy Strydom, Doreen Jacob, Taryn Pillay, Refeletse Malahlela, Sean Currin","doi":"10.1016/j.plabm.2024.e00440","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is the gold standard for measurement of immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs), but is technically demanding and less accessible in resource-limited countries. Immunoassays can also measure ISD concentrations, but may be limited by cross-reactivity. We evaluated the performance of the Roche electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) for cyclosporine, everolimus and sirolimus against LC-MS/MS in an African population for the first time.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Bias for ECLIA was estimated by comparing ECLIA-measured ISD concentrations to those obtained by LC-MS/MS in 42, 43 and 47 patient samples for cyclosporine, everolimus and sirolimus, respectively. Precision was assessed by performing replicate measurements of quality control materials.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Deming regression analysis for all ISDs showed strong correlation between ECLIA and LC-MS/MS with a Pearson's r of >0.94. The slopes for cyclosporine, everolimus and sirolimus were 0.94 [95 % CI: 0.87–1.03], 1.35 [95 % CI: 1.23–1.44] and 0.96 [95 % CI: 0.85–1.15] with y-intercepts of 31.60 μg/L [95 % CI: 2.02–57.63], 0.23 μg/L [95 % CI: 0.21 – 0.72] and 2.61 μg/L [95 % CI: 1.30–3.56], respectively. Difference plots showed a median bias of 2.07 % [95 % CI: 1.42 – 6.99 %], 41.2 % [95 % CI: 34.9–51.8 %] and 34.9 % [95 % CI: 28.4–47.3 %] for cyclosporine, everolimus and sirolimus, respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The cyclosporine ECLIA yielded results comparable to LC-MS/MS while poorly comparable results were obtained for everolimus and sirolimus, which may be explained by ISD metabolite cross-reactivity, amongst other factors. The poor comparability, although not unique, is noteworthy and the clinical consequences of these differences require further investigation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20421,"journal":{"name":"Practical Laboratory Medicine","volume":"42 ","pages":"Article e00440"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The measurement of immunosuppressive drugs by mass spectrometry and immunoassay in a South African transplant setting\",\"authors\":\"Amy Strydom, Doreen Jacob, Taryn Pillay, Refeletse Malahlela, Sean Currin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.plabm.2024.e00440\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is the gold standard for measurement of immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs), but is technically demanding and less accessible in resource-limited countries. Immunoassays can also measure ISD concentrations, but may be limited by cross-reactivity. We evaluated the performance of the Roche electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) for cyclosporine, everolimus and sirolimus against LC-MS/MS in an African population for the first time.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Bias for ECLIA was estimated by comparing ECLIA-measured ISD concentrations to those obtained by LC-MS/MS in 42, 43 and 47 patient samples for cyclosporine, everolimus and sirolimus, respectively. Precision was assessed by performing replicate measurements of quality control materials.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Deming regression analysis for all ISDs showed strong correlation between ECLIA and LC-MS/MS with a Pearson's r of >0.94. The slopes for cyclosporine, everolimus and sirolimus were 0.94 [95 % CI: 0.87–1.03], 1.35 [95 % CI: 1.23–1.44] and 0.96 [95 % CI: 0.85–1.15] with y-intercepts of 31.60 μg/L [95 % CI: 2.02–57.63], 0.23 μg/L [95 % CI: 0.21 – 0.72] and 2.61 μg/L [95 % CI: 1.30–3.56], respectively. Difference plots showed a median bias of 2.07 % [95 % CI: 1.42 – 6.99 %], 41.2 % [95 % CI: 34.9–51.8 %] and 34.9 % [95 % CI: 28.4–47.3 %] for cyclosporine, everolimus and sirolimus, respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The cyclosporine ECLIA yielded results comparable to LC-MS/MS while poorly comparable results were obtained for everolimus and sirolimus, which may be explained by ISD metabolite cross-reactivity, amongst other factors. The poor comparability, although not unique, is noteworthy and the clinical consequences of these differences require further investigation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20421,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Practical Laboratory Medicine\",\"volume\":\"42 \",\"pages\":\"Article e00440\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Practical Laboratory Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352551724000866\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Practical Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352551724000866","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The measurement of immunosuppressive drugs by mass spectrometry and immunoassay in a South African transplant setting
Objectives
Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is the gold standard for measurement of immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs), but is technically demanding and less accessible in resource-limited countries. Immunoassays can also measure ISD concentrations, but may be limited by cross-reactivity. We evaluated the performance of the Roche electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) for cyclosporine, everolimus and sirolimus against LC-MS/MS in an African population for the first time.
Methods
Bias for ECLIA was estimated by comparing ECLIA-measured ISD concentrations to those obtained by LC-MS/MS in 42, 43 and 47 patient samples for cyclosporine, everolimus and sirolimus, respectively. Precision was assessed by performing replicate measurements of quality control materials.
Results
Deming regression analysis for all ISDs showed strong correlation between ECLIA and LC-MS/MS with a Pearson's r of >0.94. The slopes for cyclosporine, everolimus and sirolimus were 0.94 [95 % CI: 0.87–1.03], 1.35 [95 % CI: 1.23–1.44] and 0.96 [95 % CI: 0.85–1.15] with y-intercepts of 31.60 μg/L [95 % CI: 2.02–57.63], 0.23 μg/L [95 % CI: 0.21 – 0.72] and 2.61 μg/L [95 % CI: 1.30–3.56], respectively. Difference plots showed a median bias of 2.07 % [95 % CI: 1.42 – 6.99 %], 41.2 % [95 % CI: 34.9–51.8 %] and 34.9 % [95 % CI: 28.4–47.3 %] for cyclosporine, everolimus and sirolimus, respectively.
Conclusions
The cyclosporine ECLIA yielded results comparable to LC-MS/MS while poorly comparable results were obtained for everolimus and sirolimus, which may be explained by ISD metabolite cross-reactivity, amongst other factors. The poor comparability, although not unique, is noteworthy and the clinical consequences of these differences require further investigation.
期刊介绍:
Practical Laboratory Medicine is a high-quality, peer-reviewed, international open-access journal publishing original research, new methods and critical evaluations, case reports and short papers in the fields of clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine. The objective of the journal is to provide practical information of immediate relevance to workers in clinical laboratories. The primary scope of the journal covers clinical chemistry, hematology, molecular biology and genetics relevant to laboratory medicine, microbiology, immunology, therapeutic drug monitoring and toxicology, laboratory management and informatics. We welcome papers which describe critical evaluations of biomarkers and their role in the diagnosis and treatment of clinically significant disease, validation of commercial and in-house IVD methods, method comparisons, interference reports, the development of new reagents and reference materials, reference range studies and regulatory compliance reports. Manuscripts describing the development of new methods applicable to laboratory medicine (including point-of-care testing) are particularly encouraged, even if preliminary or small scale.