Abstract
The performances of the QMS(®) Teicoplanin immunoassay recently developed on Cobas(®) 6000/8000 systems were evaluated and compared to a fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA) [Teicoplanin Innofluor(®) Assay (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Indianapolis, IN)] on FLX analyzer (Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL)]. The validation was performed according to the Cofrac (French Accreditation Committee) document SH GTA 04. For the comparison, 48 plasma samples were analyzed by FPIA and QMS assays. The QMS assay is accurate (intra assay and inter assay inaccuracy ≤ 2.4%) and precise (intra assay and inter assay imprecision ≤ 10.2%). A linear relationship [QMS = 1.0319 × FPIA - 2.8518, r(2) = 0.9246 (P < 0.001)] between FPIA and QMS was found. In the Bland-Altman plots, no systematic bias was found even if QMS results trends to be lower (mean of the ratio QMS concentration/FPIA concentration = 0.91). These results between QMS and FPIA are consistent, which indicates that QMS(®) Teicoplanin immunoassay on Cobas(®) 8000 System is an alternative to FPIA.
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have