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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pérez, Irene, Fernández, Lidia, Sánchez-Ramón, Silvia, Alba, Cristina, Zatarain, Ana, Cañas, Mercedes, López, Olga N., Olivares, David, Rey, Enrique, Taxonera, Carlos
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