کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
1965770 | 1538682 | 2013 | 4 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |

BackgroundThe determination of Carbohydrate Deficient Transferrin (CDT) in a forensic context should be based on the use of a screening technique followed, for the “positive samples”, by a confirmatory technique. The aim of this study was to compare the two most used automated screening methods for CDT analysis, immuno-nephelometric assay (INA) and multi-capillary electrophoresis (mCE), with a validated HPLC procedure, used as confirmation test, in order to re-evaluate the cut-off concentrations of the screening methods.Methods195 serum samples underwent CDT analysis by using the N Latex CDT direct immuno-nephelometric assay, the multicapillary system Capillarys™ and an anion exchange HPLC method with UV-visible detection at 460 nm developed and validated at our laboratories. Statistical analyses were performed by using Bland–Altman plots and ROC curves.Results and discussionThe 95% limits of agreement were ± 0.94% when comparing INA and HPLC and ± 0.60% when comparing mCE and HPLC. The ROC analysis of both INA and mCE, using HPLC as the reference method, showed that no false negative results were found when the cut-off was fixed to 1.2% for mCE and to 2.3% for INA.ConclusionsThe study showed a good agreement among CDT determinations carried out either with mCE or INA or HPLC. However, the usual cut-offs of both mCE (1.3%) and INA (2.5%) should be lowered to minimize false negatives at the screening analysis.
► CDT analysis should be carried out by screening and confirmatory techniques.
► A good agreement among immunoassay, multicapillary electrophoresis and HPLC was found.
► The usual cut-off of immunoassay and multicapillary electrophoresis should be lowered.
Journal: Clinica Chimica Acta - Volume 416, 1 February 2013, Pages 1–4