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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |