Method comparison of four clinically available assays for serum free light chain analysis

Author:

Fleming Chérina K.A.1,Swarttouw Tim1,de Kat Angelino Corrie M.2,Jacobs Joannes F.M.2,Russcher Henk1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Clinical Chemistry, Erasmus MC , University Medical Center Rotterdam , Rotterdam , The Netherlands

2. Department of Laboratory Medicine , Radboud University Medical Center , Nijmegen , The Netherlands

Abstract

Abstract Background Serum free light chain (sFLC) measurements are increasingly important in the context of screening for monoclonal gammopathies, prognostic stratification and monitoring of therapy responses. In this study we have performed a method comparison of four sFLC assays that are currently available for routine clinical use. Methods In a retrospective study, sFLC analyses were performed on a cohort that included 139 patients with various monoclonal gammopathies and 54 control sera without an M-protein. Method comparisons of the following four FLC assays were performed: Freelite (Binding Site), N-Latex FLC (Siemens), Seralite (Abingdon Health) and Sebia FLC (Sebia). Results Bland-Altman agreement analysis showed biases varying between −0.1 and 16.2 mg/L for κFLC, −6.0 and 6.8 mg/L for λFLC and −0.04 and 0.38 for the ratio of the involved to uninvolved FLC. Strong agreements were observed for FLC-concentrations below 100 mg/L. The clinical concordance of the κ/λFLC-ratio of the four methods varied between 86% and 92%. Significant quantitative differences were observed between the different methods, mainly in sera with high FLC concentrations. Most assays consistently overestimated FLC concentrations compared to SPE. Conclusions Good overall clinical concordances were observed between the four sFLC assays that were compared in this study. Although good agreements were observed between the FLC assays, significant absolute differences in FLC concentrations in individual patients can be seen, particularly at higher FLC concentrations. Because of inequivalent absolute sFLC values between the methods in individual patients, none of the four sFLC assays can be used interchangeably.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Biochemistry (medical),Clinical Biochemistry,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3