Microparticle Enzyme Immunoassay Assay Research Articles

Long‐term evaluation of analytical methods used in sirolimus therapeutic drug monitoring

Results of therapeutic monitoring of sirolimus blood concentrations are assay and laboratory dependent. This study compared performance over time of the IMx microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA), Architect chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA), and liquid chromatography with mass spectrometric detection (LC/MS/MS) as part of a proficiency testing scheme. Pooled samples from sirolimus-treated patients and whole-blood samples spiked with known quantities of sirolimus were assayed monthly between 2004 and 2012. When results of pooled patient samples were compared with LC/MS/MS, the MEIA assay showed an overall mean percent bias of -2.3% ± 11.2% that, although initially positive, became increasingly negative from 2007 through 2009. The CMIA, which replaced the MEIA assay, had a mean percent bias of 21.9% ± 12.3%, remaining stable from 2007 through 2012. Similarly, for spiked samples, the MEIA showed an increasingly negative bias over time vs. LC/MS/MS, whereas CMIA maintained a stable positive bias. Based on comparison of immunoassay measurements on individual patient samples, CMIA values were more than 25% higher than MEIA values. These results highlight the importance of continued proficiency testing and regular monitoring of sirolimus assay performance. Clinicians must be aware of the methodology used and adjust target levels accordingly to avoid potential effects on efficacy and toxicity.

Switching from HPLC/UV to MEIA for whole blood sirolimus quantitation: comparison of methods

Sirolimus is a immunosuppressive agent for renal transplant recipients. Monitoring of whole blood sirolimus concentration is necessary in order to improve clinical outcomes. An increasing number of clinical laboratories (4-14% during 2005) are using microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA) for sirolimus quantitation but previous reports indicated a high variability, with a mean difference of 17% for MEIA method vs. high-performance liquid chromatography/ultraviolet (HPLC/UV). This study was aimed at comparing the reliability of MEIA with the HPLC/UV method. Blood samples from transplant patients were processed using both HPLC/UV and MEIA assays. Comparison and Bland-Altman plots, as well as regression analysis and paired t-test were used to compare results of the assays. Concentrations were stratified into three groups and used to investigate whether any observed difference between methods could be influenced by sirolimus concentration. Regression analysis yielded a coefficient of correlation R of 0.9756, the line of best fit being y=0.9832x+0.1976. The statistical analysis showed no difference between the two sets of experimental data. The average percentage difference between the two methods was found to be -0.2+/-19.2%. On the basis of our present results, the tested MEIA assay is able to quantify sirolimus concentration with a clinically acceptable imprecision, similar to that of HPLC/UV method.

Protein interference in thyroid assays: an in vitro study with in vivo consequences

Background Pathological concentration of plasma proteins may cause problems in immunoanalytics. The low triiodotyronine (T3) and thyroxine (T4) levels, frequently found in seriously ill patients, may be ascribed either to laboratory artifact due to the lower thyroid hormone binding capacity or to a compensatory response of the organism to the disease. Methods The authors performed an in vitro experiment, in which sera of seriously ill patients with either low immunoglobulin G (IgG), and/or low albumin levels were investigated for free thyroid hormones (fT3, fT4) following stepwise adjustment of the serum IgG and/or albumin. All two hormones were measured with two different automated immunoassays: the microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA) with two steps (AxSym, Abbott, USA) and the electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA). Results The bias of fT3 and fT4 exhibited positive correlations with serum IgG and albumin. The bias of fT3 was more pronounced than that of fT4 following the addition of albumin (40–150% and 10–40%, respectively) as well as following the addition of IgG (8–30% and 0–8%, respectively). The MEIA method was more sensitively affected in case of fT4, whereas the bias of fT3 was more influenced in the ECLIA assay. In MEIA assay, the influence of albumin on the bias of fT3 and fT4 was stronger if serum IgG levels were low. Conclusion The results confirm that pathological thyroid findings in seriously ill patients may largely be ascribed to some laboratory artifacts.

Performance evaluation of a new chemiluminescent cardiac troponin I assay

Cardiac troponin I is a marker for diagnosis of myocardial damage. Several immunoassays are currently available for determination of concentrations of troponin I in serum. We evaluated a chemiluminescent assay for troponin I using ACS:180 automated analyzer (Bayer Diagnostics). We compared our results with two other immunoassays using the OPUS Magnum (OPUS troponin I assay, Dade Behring) and AxSYM (microparticle enzyme immunoassay, Abbott) analyzers. The within-run and between-run CVs were less than 5% for all three levels of controls. The chemiluminescent assay for troponin I was linear up to a serum troponin I concentration of 50 ng/mL and the detection limit was 0.1 ng/mL of troponin. A good correlation between troponin I concentration measured by the chemiluminescent assay (y axis) and the microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA) (x axis) was observed, although the concentrations of troponin I in individual specimens were approximately four times higher, when measured by the MEIA assay, than those measured by chemiluminescent assay. The correlation coefficient was 0.98 with the regression equation y = 0.22x + 1.125. We also observed a good correlation in troponin I concentrations obtained by the chemiluminescent assay (y axis) and OPUS troponin I assay (x axis). The correlation coefficient was 0.96 and the regression equation was y = 0.79x – 0.52. The correlation coefficient was 0.93 when we compared troponin I concentrations obtained by the OPUS assay (x axis) with the corresponding concentrations obtained by the MEIA assay (y axis). The corresponding regression equation was y = 0.25x + 3.5. We conclude that the chemiluminescent troponin I assay showed good analytical performance. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 14:224–229, 2000. © 2000 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Performance evaluation of a new chemiluminescent cardiac troponin I assay

Cardiac troponin I is a marker for diagnosis of myocardial damage. Several immunoassays are currently available for determination of concentrations of troponin I in serum. We evaluated a chemiluminescent assay for troponin I using ACS:180 automated analyzer (Bayer Diagnostics). We compared our results with two other immunoassays using the OPUS Magnum (OPUS troponin I assay, Dade Behring) and AxSYM (microparticle enzyme immunoassay, Abbott) analyzers. The within-run and between-run CVs were less than 5% for all three levels of controls. The chemiluminescent assay for troponin I was linear up to a serum troponin I concentration of 50 ng/mL and the detection limit was 0.1 ng/mL of troponin. A good correlation between troponin I concentration measured by the chemiluminescent assay (y axis) and the microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA) (x axis) was observed, although the concentrations of troponin I in individual specimens were approximately four times higher, when measured by the MEIA assay, than those measured by chemiluminescent assay. The correlation coefficient was 0.98 with the regression equation y = 0.22x + 1.125. We also observed a good correlation in troponin I concentrations obtained by the chemiluminescent assay (y axis) and OPUS troponin I assay (x axis). The correlation coefficient was 0.96 and the regression equation was y = 0.79x - 0.52. The correlation coefficient was 0.93 when we compared troponin I concentrations obtained by the OPUS assay (x axis) with the corresponding concentrations obtained by the MEIA assay (y axis). The corresponding regression equation was y = 0.25x + 3.5. We conclude that the chemiluminescent troponin I assay showed good analytical performance.

An immunoassay for the measurement of sirolimus

Objective This study assessed the performance characteristics of a new microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA) for the determination of sirolimus in whole blood. Background In clinical investigatory studies, dose adjustments of the immunosuppressive drug sirolimus have been carried out using either high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) or, more recently, this investigational immunoassay kit based on the MEIA technique. Methods Calibration was made over the linear range 0 to 30 ng/mL. Inaccuracy and imprecision were assessed by means of 3 control samples supplied with the kit (5, 11, and 22 ng/mL) and dilution of an above-quantitation-limit sample (154 ng/mL). Specificity was determined by the addition of 2 sirolimus metabolites to sirolimus-free human whole blood or to I of the control samples supplied with the kit. In addition, whole-blood samples from patients receiving either cyclosporine or tacrolimus (N = 24) were analyzed for sirolimus. A comparison of the MEIA and a validated HPLC/MS/MS assay analyzed both pooled samples from patients receiving sirolimus and spiked samples (sirolimus 2–60 ng/mL). In a more extensive comparison of patient samples measured by the MEIA assay, a validated HPLC assay with UV detection (HPLC-UV) was used (HPLC-UV sirolimus 7–64 ng/mL). Results Inaccuracy (between-run) was ≤ 16.2% at all 4 concentrations (N = 5). Withinassay imprecision (repeatability) was <6% (N = 5), and between-assay imprecision (reproducibility) for the same samples was <11% (N = 5). Recovery, assessed by means of 3 inhouse control samples prepared in both fresh and previously frozen sirolimus-free human whole blood, ranged from 93.9% to 109.5%. The limit of detection, determined by dilution of the lowest nonzero calibrator (3 ng/mL), was set at 1 ng/mL, at which repeatability was 20.5% (N = 5). Five ng/mL of hydroxysirolimus cross-reacted with the assay by a mean of between 44% and 50% (N = 4); 5 ng/mL of 41-O-demethylsirolimus cross-reacted with the assay by a mean of between 86% and 127% (N = 4). Assay specificity was further challenged by ethylenediamine-tetraacetic acid (EDTA)-whole-blood samples from transplant patients not receiving sirolimus. These samples had tacrolimus and cyclosporine concentrations of 7.8 to 15.9 ng/mL and 38 to 485 μg/L, respectively. The median result was 0 ng/mL (third quartile, 0.7 ng/mL; maximum, 1.4 ng/mL); no value was above the lowest nonzero calibrator. The results of the comparison between the MEIA and the HPLC/MS/MS assay showed mean positive biases of 21% and 8% for the MEIA in measuring sirolimus in pooled patient samples and spiked samples, respectively. The results of the comparison of the MEIA and HPLC-UV median sirolimus concentrations were 18.2 and 20.1. Whole-blood samples anticoagulated with EDTA and containing sirolimus were stable for analysis by MEIA for 3 freeze-thaw cycles when stored at −20 °C and for 10 days when stored at 4 °C or at ambient temperature. A decline in sirolimus concentration occurred when samples were stored at 37 °C. Conclusion The MEIA showed suitable precision across a clinically relevant concentration range. In terms of patient management, the practical significance of cross-reactivity with sirolimus metabolites remains to be assessed.

Effects of digoxinlike immunoreactive substances and digoxin FAB antibodies on the new digoxin microparticle enzyme immunoassay.

Digoxin-like immunoreactive substance (DLIS) is known to interfere with fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA) (Digoxin II, Abbott Laboratories) and falsely elevates the total digoxin concentrations. Digoxin FAB antibody (Digibind) is also known to affect digoxin results by FPIA assay. The authors studied the effects of DLIS and Digibind on a new microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA) for digoxin recently introduced by Abbott Laboratories, compared with the standard FPIA method and chemiluminescence assay (ACS-digoxin, Ciba-Corning). They studied 30 volume-expanded patients (term pregnancy, liver and renal disease) for the presence of DLIS. None of these patients received digoxin. They observed measurable DLIS concentrations in 12 of 30 patients by the FPIA assay and in only 1 patient by both MEIA and ACS assays. The concentration of DLIS in that patient was 0.31 ng/ml of digoxin equivalent by the MEIA assay, 0.36 ng/ml by the ACS assay, and 1.15 ng/ml by the FPIA assay. When they supplemented serum containing digoxin with low to high concentrations of digibind (0.5, 1.0, 2.0 and 4.0, 10, and 20 micrograms/ml), and measured digoxin concentrations by FPIA, MEIA, and ACS assays, they observed lower than expected values of total digoxin. However, when they supplemented serum containing no digoxin with high concentration of digibind (5.0, 10.0 and 20.0 micrograms/ml) and supplemented protein-free ultrafiltrates with digoxin, they observed expected digoxin concentrations in the ultrafiltrates by all three assays, indicating that the ultrafiltrates are essentially free of digibind.

Ｍｉｃｒｏｐａｒｔｉｃｌｅ Ｅｎｚｙｍｅ Ｉｍｍｕｎｏａｓｓａｙ（ＭＥＩＡ）法によるジゴキシン血中濃度測定の評価

The clinical usefulness of a microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA) method for the determination of dogoxin in serum was investigated. The inter-and intra-assay reproducibilities of this method were 2.4 to 4.9% and 3.8 to 6.2%(C.V.%), respectively.In the determination of serum digoxin levels, MEIA well correlated with fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA) (r=0.942, n=153). Cross reaction by various drugs used concomitantly with digoxin was not detected in the MEIA assay. Moreover, endogenous digoxin-like immunoreactive substance was not detected in serum from newborns (n=24) or patients with renal failure (n=42) who were not taking digoxin.