Affiliation:
1. Department of Medicine Division of Cardiovascular Medicine Vanderbilt University Medical Center Nashville Tennessee USA
2. Department of Biostatistics Vanderbilt University School of Medicine Nashville Tennessee USA
3. Structural Heart and Valve Center Vanderbilt University Medical Center Nashville Tennessee USA
Abstract
AbstractIn this study, we sought to compare protein concentrations obtained from a high‐throughput proteomics platform (Olink) on samples collected using capillary blood self‐collection (with the Tasso+ device) versus standard venipuncture (control). Blood collection was performed on 20 volunteers, including one sample obtained via venipuncture and two via capillary blood using the Tasso+ device. Tasso+ samples were stored at 2°C–8°C for 24‐hs (Tasso‐24) or 48‐h (Tasso‐48) prior to processing to simulate shipping times from a study participant's home. Proteomics were analyzed using Olink (384 Inflammatory Panel). Tasso+ blood collection was successful in 37/40 attempts. Of 230 proteins included in our analysis, Pearson correlations (r) and mean coefficient of variation (CV) between Tasso‐24 or Tasso‐48 versus venipuncture were variable. In the Tasso‐24 analysis, 34 proteins (14.8%) had both a correlation r > 0.5 and CV < 0.20. In the Tasso‐48 analysis, 68 proteins (29.6%) had a correlation r > 0.5 and CV < 0.20. Combining the Tasso‐24 and Tasso‐48 analyses, 26 (11.3%) proteins met these thresholds. We concluded that protein concentrations from Tasso+ samples processed 24–48 h after collection demonstrated wide technical variability and variable correlation with a venipuncture gold‐standard. Use of home capillary blood self‐collection for large‐scale proteomics should be limited to select proteins with good agreement with venipuncture.