Cargando…

Comparison and clinical utility evaluation of four multiple allergen simultaneous tests including two newly introduced fully automated analyzers

BACKGROUND: We compared the diagnostic performances of two newly introduced fully automated multiple allergen simultaneous tests (MAST) analyzers with two conventional MAST assays. METHODS: The serum samples from a total of 53 and 104 patients were tested for food panels and inhalant panels, respect...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rim, John Hoon, Park, Borae G., Kim, Jeong-Ho, Kim, Hyon-Suk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5574498/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28856193
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plabm.2016.01.002
_version_ 1783259851322818560
author Rim, John Hoon
Park, Borae G.
Kim, Jeong-Ho
Kim, Hyon-Suk
author_facet Rim, John Hoon
Park, Borae G.
Kim, Jeong-Ho
Kim, Hyon-Suk
author_sort Rim, John Hoon
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We compared the diagnostic performances of two newly introduced fully automated multiple allergen simultaneous tests (MAST) analyzers with two conventional MAST assays. METHODS: The serum samples from a total of 53 and 104 patients were tested for food panels and inhalant panels, respectively, in four analyzers including AdvanSure AlloScreen (LG Life Science, Korea), AdvanSure Allostation Smart II (LG Life Science), PROTIA Allergy-Q (ProteomeTech, Korea), and RIDA Allergy Screen (R-Biopharm, Germany). We compared not only the total agreement percentages but also positive propensities among four analyzers. RESULTS: Evaluation of AdvanSure Allostation Smart II as upgraded version of AdvanSure AlloScreen revealed good concordance with total agreement percentages of 93.0% and 92.2% in food and inhalant panel, respectively. Comparisons of AdvanSure Allostation Smart II or PROTIA Allergy-Q with RIDA Allergy Screen also showed good concordance performance with positive propensities of two new analyzers for common allergens (Dermatophagoides farina and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus). The changes of cut-off level resulted in various total agreement percentage fluctuations among allergens by different analyzers, although current cut-off level of class 2 appeared to be generally suitable. CONCLUSIONS: AdvanSure Allostation Smart II and PROTIA Allergy-Q presented favorable agreement performances with RIDA Allergy Screen, although positive propensities were noticed in common allergens.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5574498
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55744982017-08-30 Comparison and clinical utility evaluation of four multiple allergen simultaneous tests including two newly introduced fully automated analyzers Rim, John Hoon Park, Borae G. Kim, Jeong-Ho Kim, Hyon-Suk Pract Lab Med Research Article BACKGROUND: We compared the diagnostic performances of two newly introduced fully automated multiple allergen simultaneous tests (MAST) analyzers with two conventional MAST assays. METHODS: The serum samples from a total of 53 and 104 patients were tested for food panels and inhalant panels, respectively, in four analyzers including AdvanSure AlloScreen (LG Life Science, Korea), AdvanSure Allostation Smart II (LG Life Science), PROTIA Allergy-Q (ProteomeTech, Korea), and RIDA Allergy Screen (R-Biopharm, Germany). We compared not only the total agreement percentages but also positive propensities among four analyzers. RESULTS: Evaluation of AdvanSure Allostation Smart II as upgraded version of AdvanSure AlloScreen revealed good concordance with total agreement percentages of 93.0% and 92.2% in food and inhalant panel, respectively. Comparisons of AdvanSure Allostation Smart II or PROTIA Allergy-Q with RIDA Allergy Screen also showed good concordance performance with positive propensities of two new analyzers for common allergens (Dermatophagoides farina and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus). The changes of cut-off level resulted in various total agreement percentage fluctuations among allergens by different analyzers, although current cut-off level of class 2 appeared to be generally suitable. CONCLUSIONS: AdvanSure Allostation Smart II and PROTIA Allergy-Q presented favorable agreement performances with RIDA Allergy Screen, although positive propensities were noticed in common allergens. Elsevier 2016-01-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5574498/ /pubmed/28856193 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plabm.2016.01.002 Text en © 2016 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Research Article
Rim, John Hoon
Park, Borae G.
Kim, Jeong-Ho
Kim, Hyon-Suk
Comparison and clinical utility evaluation of four multiple allergen simultaneous tests including two newly introduced fully automated analyzers
title Comparison and clinical utility evaluation of four multiple allergen simultaneous tests including two newly introduced fully automated analyzers
title_full Comparison and clinical utility evaluation of four multiple allergen simultaneous tests including two newly introduced fully automated analyzers
title_fullStr Comparison and clinical utility evaluation of four multiple allergen simultaneous tests including two newly introduced fully automated analyzers
title_full_unstemmed Comparison and clinical utility evaluation of four multiple allergen simultaneous tests including two newly introduced fully automated analyzers
title_short Comparison and clinical utility evaluation of four multiple allergen simultaneous tests including two newly introduced fully automated analyzers
title_sort comparison and clinical utility evaluation of four multiple allergen simultaneous tests including two newly introduced fully automated analyzers
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5574498/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28856193
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plabm.2016.01.002
work_keys_str_mv AT rimjohnhoon comparisonandclinicalutilityevaluationoffourmultipleallergensimultaneoustestsincludingtwonewlyintroducedfullyautomatedanalyzers
AT parkboraeg comparisonandclinicalutilityevaluationoffourmultipleallergensimultaneoustestsincludingtwonewlyintroducedfullyautomatedanalyzers
AT kimjeongho comparisonandclinicalutilityevaluationoffourmultipleallergensimultaneoustestsincludingtwonewlyintroducedfullyautomatedanalyzers
AT kimhyonsuk comparisonandclinicalutilityevaluationoffourmultipleallergensimultaneoustestsincludingtwonewlyintroducedfullyautomatedanalyzers