PMID- 23921375
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20131202
LR  - 20220310
IS  - 1423-0097 (Electronic)
IS  - 1018-2438 (Linking)
VI  - 162
IP  - 2
DP  - 2013
TI  - Comparison of immunoglobulin E measurements on IMMULITE and ImmunoCAP in samples 
      consisting of allergen-specific mouse-human chimeric monoclonal antibodies 
      towards allergen extracts and four recombinant allergens.
PG  - 131-4
LID - 10.1159/000353276 [doi]
AB  - BACKGROUND: Specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibody in vitro tests are performed 
      on enzyme immunoassay systems. Poor agreement among systems has been reported and 
      comparisons have been made exclusively with allergen extracts - not with 
      recombinant allergens. Here we compare the ImmunoCAP and the IMMULITE systems. 
      METHODS: Ten patient samples with positive IgE toward egg white, birch pollen or 
      cat or dog dander were compared using allergen extracts or the recombinant 
      allergens Gal d 1, Bet v 1, Fel d 1 and Can f 1 with the two assay systems. 
      Comparisons were also performed using four monoclonal mouse-human chimeric IgE 
      antibodies specific for the same allergenic components. RESULTS: IMMULITE 
      estimated a higher allergen-specific IgE concentration in sera than ImmunoCAP 
      when testing with allergen extracts as well as recombinant allergens. The 
      chimeric antibodies gave an equivalent response in the total IgE and specific IgE 
      (sIgE) with an average ratio of 1.08 (range 0.9-1.3) on ImmunoCAP. In contrast, 
      IMMULITE exhibited sIgE signals that were substantially higher than the summed 
      level of IgE for all four chimeric antibodies (average ratio 2.96 and range 
      1.7-4.3). CONCLUSION: Comparison using chimeric antibodies allowed the evaluation 
      of the true performance of the systems. ImmunoCAP measured total IgE and sIgE 
      equally, whereas IMMULITE displayed higher sIgE signals when compared to the 
      summed level of total IgE for all four chimeric antibodies. Results obtained with 
      the two assay systems are not interchangeable by means of mathematical 
      conversion.
CI  - Copyright (c) 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.
FAU - Szecsi, Pal B
AU  - Szecsi PB
AD  - Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, 
      Hellerup, Denmark.
FAU - Stender, Steen
AU  - Stender S
LA  - eng
PT  - Comparative Study
PT  - Journal Article
DEP - 20130731
PL  - Switzerland
TA  - Int Arch Allergy Immunol
JT  - International archives of allergy and immunology
JID - 9211652
RN  - 0 (Allergens)
RN  - 0 (Antibodies, Monoclonal)
RN  - 0 (Antigens, Plant)
RN  - 0 (Glycoproteins)
RN  - 0 (Recombinant Fusion Proteins)
RN  - 0 (allergen Can f I)
RN  - 126161-14-6 (Bet v 1 allergen, Betula)
RN  - 37341-29-0 (Immunoglobulin E)
RN  - G408EE88II (Fel d 1 protein, Felis domesticus)
SB  - IM
MH  - Allergens/immunology
MH  - Animals
MH  - *Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology
MH  - Antigens, Plant/immunology
MH  - Cats
MH  - Dogs
MH  - Egg Hypersensitivity/immunology
MH  - Egg White
MH  - Glycoproteins/immunology
MH  - Humans
MH  - Immunoassay/*methods
MH  - Immunoglobulin E/*blood/immunology
MH  - Mice
MH  - Pollen/immunology
MH  - Recombinant Fusion Proteins/immunology
EDAT- 2013/08/08 06:00
MHDA- 2013/12/16 06:00
CRDT- 2013/08/08 06:00
PHST- 2013/02/18 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2013/05/22 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2013/08/08 06:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2013/08/08 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2013/12/16 06:00 [medline]
AID - 000353276 [pii]
AID - 10.1159/000353276 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2013;162(2):131-4. doi: 10.1159/000353276. Epub 2013 
      Jul 31.