α-地中海贫血早期洗脱峰及免疫层析试纸α-地中海贫血SEA载体筛选的稳定性及潜在干扰评价

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Wing Kit Lam, Christina Pui Ying Fan, Winnie Yim Fong Law, Tsz Fung Wong, Darcy Lok Han Too, Lok Nga Ko, Anskar Yu Hung Leung, Sze Fai Yip
{"title":"α-地中海贫血早期洗脱峰及免疫层析试纸α-地中海贫血SEA载体筛选的稳定性及潜在干扰评价","authors":"Wing Kit Lam, Christina Pui Ying Fan, Winnie Yim Fong Law, Tsz Fung Wong, Darcy Lok Han Too, Lok Nga Ko, Anskar Yu Hung Leung, Sze Fai Yip","doi":"10.1515/cclm-2025-0754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>α-Thalassaemia screening is crucial for identifying carriers at risk of having offspring with haemoglobin (Hb) Bart's hydrops fetalis syndrome. This study evaluated the performance of two potential screening methods: the α-thalassaemia early eluting peak (αEEP) identified by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and an immunochromatographic strip test (ICT), focusing on stability and potential interferences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ninety-two peripheral blood samples were used. Thirty were for assessment of αEEP and ICT stability and interference by icterus/lipaemia, and saline washing for interference removal. Diagnostic performance of αEEP and ICT were evaluated in 40 samples with glycated Hb (P2) ≥6.0 % and 22 with Hb F≥2.0 % on HPLC, using α-globin genotyping as the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both αEEP and ICT results remained stable for 14 days. Neither test was significantly affected by icterus or lipaemia, though 3 of 20 ICT results (15 %) showed discordance after saline washing. Elevated HbA<sub>1c</sub> and Hb F altered early eluting peak patterns but did not affect αEEP interpretation. For detecting --<sup>SEA</sup> mutation, αEEP showed 100 % sensitivity and 100 % specificity when P2≥6.0 % or Hb F≥2.0 %, while ICT a low specificity (45 %) when Hb F≥2.0 %.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>αEEP showed reliable performance in detecting α<sup>0</sup>-thalassaemia with --<sup>SEA</sup> mutation in all conditions tested, while ICT showed low specificity when Hb F≥2.0 %. These findings support αEEP as a reliable test for routine clinical laboratory use, while cautions should be made for ICT in case of elevated Hb F levels.</p>","PeriodicalId":10390,"journal":{"name":"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of stability and potential interference on the α-thalassaemia early eluting peak and immunochromatographic strip test for α-thalassaemia --<sup>SEA</sup> carrier screening.\",\"authors\":\"Wing Kit Lam, Christina Pui Ying Fan, Winnie Yim Fong Law, Tsz Fung Wong, Darcy Lok Han Too, Lok Nga Ko, Anskar Yu Hung Leung, Sze Fai Yip\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/cclm-2025-0754\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>α-Thalassaemia screening is crucial for identifying carriers at risk of having offspring with haemoglobin (Hb) Bart's hydrops fetalis syndrome. This study evaluated the performance of two potential screening methods: the α-thalassaemia early eluting peak (αEEP) identified by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and an immunochromatographic strip test (ICT), focusing on stability and potential interferences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ninety-two peripheral blood samples were used. Thirty were for assessment of αEEP and ICT stability and interference by icterus/lipaemia, and saline washing for interference removal. Diagnostic performance of αEEP and ICT were evaluated in 40 samples with glycated Hb (P2) ≥6.0 % and 22 with Hb F≥2.0 % on HPLC, using α-globin genotyping as the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both αEEP and ICT results remained stable for 14 days. Neither test was significantly affected by icterus or lipaemia, though 3 of 20 ICT results (15 %) showed discordance after saline washing. Elevated HbA<sub>1c</sub> and Hb F altered early eluting peak patterns but did not affect αEEP interpretation. For detecting --<sup>SEA</sup> mutation, αEEP showed 100 % sensitivity and 100 % specificity when P2≥6.0 % or Hb F≥2.0 %, while ICT a low specificity (45 %) when Hb F≥2.0 %.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>αEEP showed reliable performance in detecting α<sup>0</sup>-thalassaemia with --<sup>SEA</sup> mutation in all conditions tested, while ICT showed low specificity when Hb F≥2.0 %. These findings support αEEP as a reliable test for routine clinical laboratory use, while cautions should be made for ICT in case of elevated Hb F levels.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2025-0754\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2025-0754","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:α-地中海贫血筛查对于确定后代有血红蛋白(Hb)巴特氏水肿胎儿综合征风险的携带者至关重要。本研究评价了高效液相色谱(HPLC)和免疫层析条带试验(ICT)鉴定α-地中海贫血早期洗脱峰(αEEP)两种潜在筛选方法的性能,重点考察了稳定性和潜在干扰。方法:采用92份外周血标本。30个实验组用于评估α - eep和ICT的稳定性和黄疸/脂血症的干扰,并进行盐水洗涤去除干扰。以α-珠蛋白基因分型为金标准,对40例糖化Hb (P2)≥6.0 %和22例Hb F≥2.0 %的患者进行α- eep和ICT的高效液相色谱诊断效果评价。结果:αEEP和ICT结果均保持稳定。虽然20个ICT结果中有3个(15% %)在盐水洗涤后显示不一致,但这两项测试均未受到黄疸或血脂的显著影响。升高的HbA1c和Hb F改变了早期洗脱峰模式,但不影响αEEP的解释。对于检测-SEA突变,α - eep在P2≥6.0 %或Hb F≥2.0 %时灵敏度为100 %,特异性为100 %,而ICT在Hb F≥2.0 %时特异性较低(45 %)。结论:αEEP对α0- SEA突变型地中海贫血的检测结果可靠,而当Hb F≥2.0 %时,ICT的特异性较低。这些发现支持α - eep作为常规临床实验室使用的可靠测试,但在Hb F水平升高的情况下,ICT应引起注意。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of stability and potential interference on the α-thalassaemia early eluting peak and immunochromatographic strip test for α-thalassaemia --SEA carrier screening.

Objectives: α-Thalassaemia screening is crucial for identifying carriers at risk of having offspring with haemoglobin (Hb) Bart's hydrops fetalis syndrome. This study evaluated the performance of two potential screening methods: the α-thalassaemia early eluting peak (αEEP) identified by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and an immunochromatographic strip test (ICT), focusing on stability and potential interferences.

Methods: Ninety-two peripheral blood samples were used. Thirty were for assessment of αEEP and ICT stability and interference by icterus/lipaemia, and saline washing for interference removal. Diagnostic performance of αEEP and ICT were evaluated in 40 samples with glycated Hb (P2) ≥6.0 % and 22 with Hb F≥2.0 % on HPLC, using α-globin genotyping as the gold standard.

Results: Both αEEP and ICT results remained stable for 14 days. Neither test was significantly affected by icterus or lipaemia, though 3 of 20 ICT results (15 %) showed discordance after saline washing. Elevated HbA1c and Hb F altered early eluting peak patterns but did not affect αEEP interpretation. For detecting --SEA mutation, αEEP showed 100 % sensitivity and 100 % specificity when P2≥6.0 % or Hb F≥2.0 %, while ICT a low specificity (45 %) when Hb F≥2.0 %.

Conclusions: αEEP showed reliable performance in detecting α0-thalassaemia with --SEA mutation in all conditions tested, while ICT showed low specificity when Hb F≥2.0 %. These findings support αEEP as a reliable test for routine clinical laboratory use, while cautions should be made for ICT in case of elevated Hb F levels.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine
Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
16.20%
发文量
306
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) publishes articles on novel teaching and training methods applicable to laboratory medicine. CCLM welcomes contributions on the progress in fundamental and applied research and cutting-edge clinical laboratory medicine. It is one of the leading journals in the field, with an impact factor over 3. CCLM is issued monthly, and it is published in print and electronically. CCLM is the official journal of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) and publishes regularly EFLM recommendations and news. CCLM is the official journal of the National Societies from Austria (ÖGLMKC); Belgium (RBSLM); Germany (DGKL); Hungary (MLDT); Ireland (ACBI); Italy (SIBioC); Portugal (SPML); and Slovenia (SZKK); and it is affiliated to AACB (Australia) and SFBC (France). Topics: - clinical biochemistry - clinical genomics and molecular biology - clinical haematology and coagulation - clinical immunology and autoimmunity - clinical microbiology - drug monitoring and analysis - evaluation of diagnostic biomarkers - disease-oriented topics (cardiovascular disease, cancer diagnostics, diabetes) - new reagents, instrumentation and technologies - new methodologies - reference materials and methods - reference values and decision limits - quality and safety in laboratory medicine - translational laboratory medicine - clinical metrology Follow @cclm_degruyter on Twitter!
×
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