Comparative evaluation of point of care assay with ELISA techniques for quantifying serum concentrations of ustekinumab in inflammatory bowel disease patients.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Carles Iniesta-Navalón, Manuel Ríos-Saorín, Lorena Rentero-Redondo, Rebeca Añez-Castaño, Elena Urbieta-Sanz
{"title":"Comparative evaluation of point of care assay with ELISA techniques for quantifying serum concentrations of ustekinumab in inflammatory bowel disease patients.","authors":"Carles Iniesta-Navalón, Manuel Ríos-Saorín, Lorena Rentero-Redondo, Rebeca Añez-Castaño, Elena Urbieta-Sanz","doi":"10.1016/j.gastrohep.2024.502277","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the analytical performance and clinical utility of the POC-AFIAS assay in comparison with two ELISA established assays for quantifying serum concentrations of ustekinumab.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective study was conducted. Consecutive serum samples from adult patients undergoing treatment with ustekinumab were collected. Three analytical techniques were compared for the quantification of ustekinumab serum concentrations: the AFIAS-10® POC assay (POC-AFIAS), the Promonitor® ELISA assay (ELISA-PRO), and the ELISA Ridascreen® assay (ELISA-RDSC). Ustekinumab concentrations were evaluated within three therapeutic ranges: <1μg/mL, 1-4.5μg/mL, and >4.5μg/mL. Statistical analysis included Pearson correlation, intra-class correlation coefficient, and Bland-Altman analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 104 patients were included in the study. The median ustekinumab concentrations measured were 5.22μg/mL (POC-AFIAS), 3.99μg/mL (ELISA-PRO), and 4.50μg/mL (ELISA-RDSC). Strong correlations were observed between techniques (POC-AFIAS and ELISA-PRO: r=0.921, POC-AFIAS and ELISA-RDSC: r=0.940, ELISA-PRO and ELISA-RDSC: r=0.976). The Bland-Altman analysis revealed a bias difference of 1.81μg/mL between POC-AFIAS and ELISA-PRO, and 1.27μg/mL between POC-AFIAS and ELISA-RDSC. Agreement rates varied by therapeutic range, with the highest agreement observed within the therapeutic range (97.3%) and lower agreement for supra-therapeutic concentrations (74.6%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrated that the POC-AFIAS assay provides comparable results to established ELISA techniques for quantifying serum concentrations of ustekinumab, particularly within the therapeutic range. The findings suggest that the POC-AFIAS assay offers a rapid and effective tool for managing ustekinumab therapy in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":12802,"journal":{"name":"Gastroenterologia y hepatologia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastroenterologia y hepatologia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gastrohep.2024.502277","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the analytical performance and clinical utility of the POC-AFIAS assay in comparison with two ELISA established assays for quantifying serum concentrations of ustekinumab.

Methods: A prospective study was conducted. Consecutive serum samples from adult patients undergoing treatment with ustekinumab were collected. Three analytical techniques were compared for the quantification of ustekinumab serum concentrations: the AFIAS-10® POC assay (POC-AFIAS), the Promonitor® ELISA assay (ELISA-PRO), and the ELISA Ridascreen® assay (ELISA-RDSC). Ustekinumab concentrations were evaluated within three therapeutic ranges: <1μg/mL, 1-4.5μg/mL, and >4.5μg/mL. Statistical analysis included Pearson correlation, intra-class correlation coefficient, and Bland-Altman analysis.

Results: A total of 104 patients were included in the study. The median ustekinumab concentrations measured were 5.22μg/mL (POC-AFIAS), 3.99μg/mL (ELISA-PRO), and 4.50μg/mL (ELISA-RDSC). Strong correlations were observed between techniques (POC-AFIAS and ELISA-PRO: r=0.921, POC-AFIAS and ELISA-RDSC: r=0.940, ELISA-PRO and ELISA-RDSC: r=0.976). The Bland-Altman analysis revealed a bias difference of 1.81μg/mL between POC-AFIAS and ELISA-PRO, and 1.27μg/mL between POC-AFIAS and ELISA-RDSC. Agreement rates varied by therapeutic range, with the highest agreement observed within the therapeutic range (97.3%) and lower agreement for supra-therapeutic concentrations (74.6%).

Conclusion: This study demonstrated that the POC-AFIAS assay provides comparable results to established ELISA techniques for quantifying serum concentrations of ustekinumab, particularly within the therapeutic range. The findings suggest that the POC-AFIAS assay offers a rapid and effective tool for managing ustekinumab therapy in clinical practice.

用于定量炎症性肠病患者血清中乌司替尼浓度的护理点测定与酶联免疫吸附技术的比较评估
目的:评估POC-AFIAS检测法与两种ELISA检测法的分析性能和临床实用性:进行了一项前瞻性研究。方法:进行了一项前瞻性研究,连续采集了接受乌司替尼治疗的成年患者的血清样本。对三种分析技术进行了比较,以量化乌司替库单抗的血清浓度:AFIAS-10® POC 分析法 (POC-AFIAS)、Promonitor® ELISA 分析法 (ELISA-PRO) 和 ELISA Ridascreen® 分析法 (ELISA-RDSC):4.5 µg/mL。统计分析包括皮尔逊相关性、类内相关系数和Bland-Altman分析:结果:共有 104 名患者参与了研究。测得的乌司替尼浓度中位数分别为 5.22 微克/毫升(POC-AFIAS)、3.99 微克/毫升(ELISA-PRO)和 4.50 微克/毫升(ELISA-RDSC)。不同技术之间存在很强的相关性(POC-AFIAS 和 ELISA-PRO:r=0.921;POC-AFIAS 和 ELISA-RDSC:r=0.940;ELISA-PRO 和 ELISA-RDSC:r=0.976)。Bland-Altman分析显示,POC-AFIAS和ELISA-PRO之间的偏差为1.81微克/毫升,POC-AFIAS和ELISA-RDSC之间的偏差为1.27微克/毫升。不同治疗范围的吻合率各不相同,治疗范围内的吻合率最高(97.3%),超治疗浓度的吻合率较低(74.6%):本研究表明,POC-AFIAS 检测法在定量检测乌司替尼的血清浓度方面,尤其是在治疗范围内,可提供与现有 ELISA 技术相当的结果。研究结果表明,POC-AFIAS 检测法为临床实践中管理乌司替库单抗治疗提供了一种快速有效的工具。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Gastroenterologia y hepatologia
Gastroenterologia y hepatologia GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
10.50%
发文量
147
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: Gastroenterology and Hepatology is the first journal to cover the latest advances in pathology of the gastrointestinal tract, liver, pancreas, and bile ducts, making it an indispensable tool for gastroenterologists, hepatologists, internists and general practitioners.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信