Comparison of Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay and Lateral Flow Assay to Measure Thyroid-Stimulating Hormone and Free T4 in Human Serum

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Rolando Advíncula-Espino, Jair Li, Jaime Rosales-Rimache
{"title":"Comparison of Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay and Lateral Flow Assay to Measure Thyroid-Stimulating Hormone and Free T4 in Human Serum","authors":"Rolando Advíncula-Espino,&nbsp;Jair Li,&nbsp;Jaime Rosales-Rimache","doi":"10.1002/jcla.70032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Thyroid disorders affect millions of people around the world, mainly women. Measurement of hormones is critical in their identification, treatment, and monitoring; Therefore, the methods must be as reliable and valid as possible.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We designed a cross-sectional study to compare thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) and free tetraiodothyronine (fT4) concentrations using ELISA (Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay) and LFA (Lateral Flow Assay) in human serum samples. We obtained 96 serum samples that were evaluated with a commercial kit for ELISA (Accubind Monobite, Lake Forest, California, US) and LFA (Micropofit Fluorecare, Guangdong, Shenzhen, China). We used the Wilcoxon nonparametric test, Bland–Altman, and Passing-Bablok regression to compare TSH and fT4 concentrations obtained by ELISA and LFA.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The median TSH concentrations obtained by ELISA and LFA were 1.92 and 2.11 μIU/mL, and for fT4 were 1.14 and 1.10 ng/dL. On the other hand, the Spearman's rho between ELISA and LFA for TSH was 0.845. The TSH concentrations between ELISA and LFA had significant differences (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05). About fT4, the Spearman's rho between methods was 0.348. The bias for TSH was −0.315, and for fT4 was −0.013. The Deming regression for TSH (<i>p</i> = 0.309) and fT4 (=0.938) shows that the levels obtained by both methods do not present significant differences, and the Passing-Bablok regression identifies significant bias between both methods, especially for fT4, in the range of concentrations studied.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>TSH measurement by LFA may be a viable alternative to evaluate thyroid diseases, but fT4 by LFA is not precise and presents a high bias.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15509,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis","volume":"39 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jcla.70032","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jcla.70032","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Thyroid disorders affect millions of people around the world, mainly women. Measurement of hormones is critical in their identification, treatment, and monitoring; Therefore, the methods must be as reliable and valid as possible.

Methods

We designed a cross-sectional study to compare thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) and free tetraiodothyronine (fT4) concentrations using ELISA (Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay) and LFA (Lateral Flow Assay) in human serum samples. We obtained 96 serum samples that were evaluated with a commercial kit for ELISA (Accubind Monobite, Lake Forest, California, US) and LFA (Micropofit Fluorecare, Guangdong, Shenzhen, China). We used the Wilcoxon nonparametric test, Bland–Altman, and Passing-Bablok regression to compare TSH and fT4 concentrations obtained by ELISA and LFA.

Results

The median TSH concentrations obtained by ELISA and LFA were 1.92 and 2.11 μIU/mL, and for fT4 were 1.14 and 1.10 ng/dL. On the other hand, the Spearman's rho between ELISA and LFA for TSH was 0.845. The TSH concentrations between ELISA and LFA had significant differences (p < 0.05). About fT4, the Spearman's rho between methods was 0.348. The bias for TSH was −0.315, and for fT4 was −0.013. The Deming regression for TSH (p = 0.309) and fT4 (=0.938) shows that the levels obtained by both methods do not present significant differences, and the Passing-Bablok regression identifies significant bias between both methods, especially for fT4, in the range of concentrations studied.

Conclusion

TSH measurement by LFA may be a viable alternative to evaluate thyroid diseases, but fT4 by LFA is not precise and presents a high bias.

Abstract Image

酶联免疫吸附法和侧流法测定人血清促甲状腺激素和游离T4的比较。
背景:甲状腺疾病影响着全世界数百万人,主要是女性。激素的测量对其识别、治疗和监测至关重要;因此,这些方法必须尽可能的可靠和有效。方法:我们设计了一项横断面研究,采用ELISA(酶联免疫吸附法)和LFA(横向流动法)比较人血清样本中促甲状腺激素(TSH)和游离四碘甲状腺原氨酸(fT4)的浓度。我们获得96份血清样本,用ELISA商用试剂盒(Accubind Monobite, Lake Forest, California,美国)和LFA (Micropofit Fluorecare,广东,深圳,中国)进行评估。我们使用Wilcoxon非参数检验、Bland-Altman和Passing-Bablok回归来比较ELISA和LFA获得的TSH和fT4浓度。结果:ELISA法和LFA法测得的TSH中位浓度分别为1.92和2.11 μIU/mL, fT4中位浓度分别为1.14和1.10 ng/dL。另一方面,ELISA与LFA测定TSH的Spearman’s rho为0.845。结论:LFA测定TSH可能是评估甲状腺疾病的一种可行的替代方法,但LFA测定fT4不准确且存在高偏倚。
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
Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis
Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
7.40%
发文量
584
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis publishes original articles on newly developing modes of technology and laboratory assays, with emphasis on their application in current and future clinical laboratory testing. This includes reports from the following fields: immunochemistry and toxicology, hematology and hematopathology, immunopathology, molecular diagnostics, microbiology, genetic testing, immunohematology, and clinical chemistry.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信