Cargando…
Reliability evaluation of four different assays for therapeutic drug monitoring of infliximab levels
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate reliability of four different assays for measuring infliximab trough levels and antibodies to infliximab (ATI). METHODS: In this non-interventional, cross-sectional study including IBD patients, infliximab levels and ATI were measured using four diff...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6048662/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30034528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1756284818783613 |
_version_ | 1783340133825642496 |
---|---|
author | Pérez, Irene Fernández, Lidia Sánchez-Ramón, Silvia Alba, Cristina Zatarain, Ana Cañas, Mercedes López, Olga N. Olivares, David Rey, Enrique Taxonera, Carlos |
author_facet | Pérez, Irene Fernández, Lidia Sánchez-Ramón, Silvia Alba, Cristina Zatarain, Ana Cañas, Mercedes López, Olga N. Olivares, David Rey, Enrique Taxonera, Carlos |
author_sort | Pérez, Irene |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate reliability of four different assays for measuring infliximab trough levels and antibodies to infliximab (ATI). METHODS: In this non-interventional, cross-sectional study including IBD patients, infliximab levels and ATI were measured using four different assays: Lisa-Tracker, Promonitor, Q-Inflixi and Sanquin. Reliability and agreement for infliximab levels was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland–Altman plots. Qualitative agreement for infliximab (based on a pre-established target window of trough levels between 3 µg/ml and 7 µg/ml) and for ATI were estimated by Cohen’s kappa. RESULTS: Serum samples of 84 IBD patients were evaluated for infliximab using the four assays. Reliability was ‘substantial’ between Lisa-Tracker versus Promonitor and ‘almost perfect’ between the remaining assay pairs, with ICCs [95% confidence interval (CI)] ranging from 0.93 (0.70–0.97) for Lisa-Tracker versus Promonitor to 0.97 (0.95–0.98) for Q-Inflixi versus Sanquin. Bland–Altman plots showed significant bias between assays except Promonitor versus Q-Inflixi, which had excellent agreement. The greatest differences in mean infliximab were found between Promonitor versus Lisa-Tracker (–0.91 µg/ml) and Lisa-Tracker versus Q-Inflixi (0.69 µg/ml). Qualitative agreement for infliximab was ‘almost perfect’ for Promonitor versus Q-Inflixi (kappa 0.84) and Q-Inflixi versus Sanquin (kappa 0.81), and ‘substantial’ for the remaining pairs. More than 10% of patients who had infliximab levels within the target interval by Lisa-Tracker had suboptimal concentrations (<3 µg/ml) with Promonitor and Q-Inflixi. Furthermore, 11% of patients within the target interval by Q-Inflixi had supra-optimal levels (>7 µg/ml) by Lisa-Tracker. In the remaining paired comparisons, fewer than 5% of patients were placed in different subgroups. Qualitative agreement for ATI fluctuated between ‘moderate’ and ‘almost perfect’. CONCLUSIONS: All four assays seem suitable for therapeutic drug monitoring of infliximab. Promonitor and Q-Inflixi had the best agreement, making those assays fully interchangeable. Systematic biases between Lisa-Tracker with Promonitor and Q-Inflixi suggest that these assays should not be interchanged during the follow up of an individual patient. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6048662 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60486622018-07-20 Reliability evaluation of four different assays for therapeutic drug monitoring of infliximab levels Pérez, Irene Fernández, Lidia Sánchez-Ramón, Silvia Alba, Cristina Zatarain, Ana Cañas, Mercedes López, Olga N. Olivares, David Rey, Enrique Taxonera, Carlos Therap Adv Gastroenterol Original Research BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate reliability of four different assays for measuring infliximab trough levels and antibodies to infliximab (ATI). METHODS: In this non-interventional, cross-sectional study including IBD patients, infliximab levels and ATI were measured using four different assays: Lisa-Tracker, Promonitor, Q-Inflixi and Sanquin. Reliability and agreement for infliximab levels was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland–Altman plots. Qualitative agreement for infliximab (based on a pre-established target window of trough levels between 3 µg/ml and 7 µg/ml) and for ATI were estimated by Cohen’s kappa. RESULTS: Serum samples of 84 IBD patients were evaluated for infliximab using the four assays. Reliability was ‘substantial’ between Lisa-Tracker versus Promonitor and ‘almost perfect’ between the remaining assay pairs, with ICCs [95% confidence interval (CI)] ranging from 0.93 (0.70–0.97) for Lisa-Tracker versus Promonitor to 0.97 (0.95–0.98) for Q-Inflixi versus Sanquin. Bland–Altman plots showed significant bias between assays except Promonitor versus Q-Inflixi, which had excellent agreement. The greatest differences in mean infliximab were found between Promonitor versus Lisa-Tracker (–0.91 µg/ml) and Lisa-Tracker versus Q-Inflixi (0.69 µg/ml). Qualitative agreement for infliximab was ‘almost perfect’ for Promonitor versus Q-Inflixi (kappa 0.84) and Q-Inflixi versus Sanquin (kappa 0.81), and ‘substantial’ for the remaining pairs. More than 10% of patients who had infliximab levels within the target interval by Lisa-Tracker had suboptimal concentrations (<3 µg/ml) with Promonitor and Q-Inflixi. Furthermore, 11% of patients within the target interval by Q-Inflixi had supra-optimal levels (>7 µg/ml) by Lisa-Tracker. In the remaining paired comparisons, fewer than 5% of patients were placed in different subgroups. Qualitative agreement for ATI fluctuated between ‘moderate’ and ‘almost perfect’. CONCLUSIONS: All four assays seem suitable for therapeutic drug monitoring of infliximab. Promonitor and Q-Inflixi had the best agreement, making those assays fully interchangeable. Systematic biases between Lisa-Tracker with Promonitor and Q-Inflixi suggest that these assays should not be interchanged during the follow up of an individual patient. SAGE Publications 2018-06-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6048662/ /pubmed/30034528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1756284818783613 Text en © The Author(s), 2018 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Pérez, Irene Fernández, Lidia Sánchez-Ramón, Silvia Alba, Cristina Zatarain, Ana Cañas, Mercedes López, Olga N. Olivares, David Rey, Enrique Taxonera, Carlos Reliability evaluation of four different assays for therapeutic drug monitoring of infliximab levels |
title | Reliability evaluation of four different assays for therapeutic drug
monitoring of infliximab levels |
title_full | Reliability evaluation of four different assays for therapeutic drug
monitoring of infliximab levels |
title_fullStr | Reliability evaluation of four different assays for therapeutic drug
monitoring of infliximab levels |
title_full_unstemmed | Reliability evaluation of four different assays for therapeutic drug
monitoring of infliximab levels |
title_short | Reliability evaluation of four different assays for therapeutic drug
monitoring of infliximab levels |
title_sort | reliability evaluation of four different assays for therapeutic drug
monitoring of infliximab levels |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6048662/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30034528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1756284818783613 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT perezirene reliabilityevaluationoffourdifferentassaysfortherapeuticdrugmonitoringofinfliximablevels AT fernandezlidia reliabilityevaluationoffourdifferentassaysfortherapeuticdrugmonitoringofinfliximablevels AT sanchezramonsilvia reliabilityevaluationoffourdifferentassaysfortherapeuticdrugmonitoringofinfliximablevels AT albacristina reliabilityevaluationoffourdifferentassaysfortherapeuticdrugmonitoringofinfliximablevels AT zatarainana reliabilityevaluationoffourdifferentassaysfortherapeuticdrugmonitoringofinfliximablevels AT canasmercedes reliabilityevaluationoffourdifferentassaysfortherapeuticdrugmonitoringofinfliximablevels AT lopezolgan reliabilityevaluationoffourdifferentassaysfortherapeuticdrugmonitoringofinfliximablevels AT olivaresdavid reliabilityevaluationoffourdifferentassaysfortherapeuticdrugmonitoringofinfliximablevels AT reyenrique reliabilityevaluationoffourdifferentassaysfortherapeuticdrugmonitoringofinfliximablevels AT taxoneracarlos reliabilityevaluationoffourdifferentassaysfortherapeuticdrugmonitoringofinfliximablevels |