Immunohistochemistry Assays Based on Ready-To-Use Antibodies and Vendor-Recommended Protocol Settings Often Perform Suboptimally.

IF 1.2
Dordi Lea, Ivar Skaland
{"title":"Immunohistochemistry Assays Based on Ready-To-Use Antibodies and Vendor-Recommended Protocol Settings Often Perform Suboptimally.","authors":"Dordi Lea, Ivar Skaland","doi":"10.1097/PAI.0000000000001349","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The use of ready-to-use (RTU) antibodies in pathology laboratories has increased due to regulatory changes and the need for standardized, efficient diagnostic workflows. This study compares the performance of RTU antibodies from 2 major suppliers, Agilent (Dako Omnis platform) and Roche (BenchMark Ultra Plus system) in a Norwegian hospital setting. A total of 125 RTU antibodies were evaluated using vendor-recommended protocol settings (VRPS) and scored according to NordiQC standards. Results showed that 58 out of 62 antibodies on the Dako Omnis platform were rated as \"optimal\" or \"good,\" compared with 37 out of 63 on the BenchMark Ultra Plus. Notably, 26 (41.3%) of Roche antibodies were rated \"borderline\" or \"poor.\" Our study shows that several RTU antibodies perform suboptimally with VRPS. This highlights the importance of thorough validation and verification of RTU antibodies before diagnostic use. The findings underscore the need for reliable protocols from manufacturers and encourage interlaboratory collaboration to improve diagnostic consistency and quality assurance.</p>","PeriodicalId":520562,"journal":{"name":"Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PAI.0000000000001349","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of ready-to-use (RTU) antibodies in pathology laboratories has increased due to regulatory changes and the need for standardized, efficient diagnostic workflows. This study compares the performance of RTU antibodies from 2 major suppliers, Agilent (Dako Omnis platform) and Roche (BenchMark Ultra Plus system) in a Norwegian hospital setting. A total of 125 RTU antibodies were evaluated using vendor-recommended protocol settings (VRPS) and scored according to NordiQC standards. Results showed that 58 out of 62 antibodies on the Dako Omnis platform were rated as "optimal" or "good," compared with 37 out of 63 on the BenchMark Ultra Plus. Notably, 26 (41.3%) of Roche antibodies were rated "borderline" or "poor." Our study shows that several RTU antibodies perform suboptimally with VRPS. This highlights the importance of thorough validation and verification of RTU antibodies before diagnostic use. The findings underscore the need for reliable protocols from manufacturers and encourage interlaboratory collaboration to improve diagnostic consistency and quality assurance.

基于现成抗体和供应商推荐的方案设置的免疫组织化学分析通常表现不佳。
由于监管变化和对标准化、高效诊断工作流程的需求,病理实验室使用即用型抗体(RTU)的情况有所增加。本研究比较了两家主要供应商安捷伦(Dako Omnis平台)和罗氏(BenchMark Ultra Plus系统)在挪威医院环境中的RTU抗体的性能。使用供应商推荐的协议设置(VRPS)对125个RTU抗体进行评估,并根据NordiQC标准进行评分。结果显示,Dako Omnis平台上的62种抗体中有58种被评为“最佳”或“良好”,而BenchMark Ultra Plus平台上的63种抗体中有37种被评为“最佳”或“良好”。值得注意的是,26个(41.3%)罗氏抗体被评为“边缘”或“差”。我们的研究表明,几种RTU抗体对VRPS的表现不理想。这突出了在诊断使用之前对RTU抗体进行彻底验证和验证的重要性。研究结果强调了制造商制定可靠方案的必要性,并鼓励实验室间合作以提高诊断一致性和质量保证。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
小红书