Cargando…

New Faecal Calprotectin Assay by IDS: Validation and Comparison to DiaSorin Method

Background: The faecal calprotectin (FC) measurement is used for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) diagnosis and follow-up. The aim of this study was to validate for the first time the new IDS FC extraction device and immunoassay kit, and to compare it with the DiaSorin test in patients with and with...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Castiglione, Vincent, Berodes, Maëlle, Lukas, Pierre, Louis, Edouard, Cavalier, Etienne, Lutteri, Laurence
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9600005/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36292026
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12102338
_version_ 1784816733632069632
author Castiglione, Vincent
Berodes, Maëlle
Lukas, Pierre
Louis, Edouard
Cavalier, Etienne
Lutteri, Laurence
author_facet Castiglione, Vincent
Berodes, Maëlle
Lukas, Pierre
Louis, Edouard
Cavalier, Etienne
Lutteri, Laurence
author_sort Castiglione, Vincent
collection PubMed
description Background: The faecal calprotectin (FC) measurement is used for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) diagnosis and follow-up. The aim of this study was to validate for the first time the new IDS FC extraction device and immunoassay kit, and to compare it with the DiaSorin test in patients with and without IBD. Methods: First, the precision of the IDS assay and its stability were assessed. Then, 379 stool extracts were analysed with the IDS kit on iSYS and compared with a DiaSorin Liaison XL assay. Results: The intra- and inter-assay CVs did not exceed 5%. The stool samples were stable up to 4 weeks at −20 °C. Lot-to-lot comparison showed a good correlation (Lot1 = 1.06 × Lot2 + 0.60; p > 0.05). The Passing and Bablok regression showed no significant deviation from linearity between the two methods (IDS = 1.06 × DiaSorin − 0.6; p > 0.05; concordance correlation coefficient = 0.93). According to the recommended cut-offs, the IDS assay identified more IBD and irritable bowel syndrome patients than DiaSorin, which had more borderline results (16 vs. 20%, respectively). Conclusions: The IDS faecal calprotectin had good analytical validation parameters. Compared to the DiaSorin method, it showed comparable results, but slightly outperformed it in the identification of more IBD patients and active disease.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9600005
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96000052022-10-27 New Faecal Calprotectin Assay by IDS: Validation and Comparison to DiaSorin Method Castiglione, Vincent Berodes, Maëlle Lukas, Pierre Louis, Edouard Cavalier, Etienne Lutteri, Laurence Diagnostics (Basel) Article Background: The faecal calprotectin (FC) measurement is used for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) diagnosis and follow-up. The aim of this study was to validate for the first time the new IDS FC extraction device and immunoassay kit, and to compare it with the DiaSorin test in patients with and without IBD. Methods: First, the precision of the IDS assay and its stability were assessed. Then, 379 stool extracts were analysed with the IDS kit on iSYS and compared with a DiaSorin Liaison XL assay. Results: The intra- and inter-assay CVs did not exceed 5%. The stool samples were stable up to 4 weeks at −20 °C. Lot-to-lot comparison showed a good correlation (Lot1 = 1.06 × Lot2 + 0.60; p > 0.05). The Passing and Bablok regression showed no significant deviation from linearity between the two methods (IDS = 1.06 × DiaSorin − 0.6; p > 0.05; concordance correlation coefficient = 0.93). According to the recommended cut-offs, the IDS assay identified more IBD and irritable bowel syndrome patients than DiaSorin, which had more borderline results (16 vs. 20%, respectively). Conclusions: The IDS faecal calprotectin had good analytical validation parameters. Compared to the DiaSorin method, it showed comparable results, but slightly outperformed it in the identification of more IBD patients and active disease. MDPI 2022-09-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9600005/ /pubmed/36292026 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12102338 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Castiglione, Vincent
Berodes, Maëlle
Lukas, Pierre
Louis, Edouard
Cavalier, Etienne
Lutteri, Laurence
New Faecal Calprotectin Assay by IDS: Validation and Comparison to DiaSorin Method
title New Faecal Calprotectin Assay by IDS: Validation and Comparison to DiaSorin Method
title_full New Faecal Calprotectin Assay by IDS: Validation and Comparison to DiaSorin Method
title_fullStr New Faecal Calprotectin Assay by IDS: Validation and Comparison to DiaSorin Method
title_full_unstemmed New Faecal Calprotectin Assay by IDS: Validation and Comparison to DiaSorin Method
title_short New Faecal Calprotectin Assay by IDS: Validation and Comparison to DiaSorin Method
title_sort new faecal calprotectin assay by ids: validation and comparison to diasorin method
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9600005/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36292026
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12102338
work_keys_str_mv AT castiglionevincent newfaecalcalprotectinassaybyidsvalidationandcomparisontodiasorinmethod
AT berodesmaelle newfaecalcalprotectinassaybyidsvalidationandcomparisontodiasorinmethod
AT lukaspierre newfaecalcalprotectinassaybyidsvalidationandcomparisontodiasorinmethod
AT louisedouard newfaecalcalprotectinassaybyidsvalidationandcomparisontodiasorinmethod
AT cavalieretienne newfaecalcalprotectinassaybyidsvalidationandcomparisontodiasorinmethod
AT lutterilaurence newfaecalcalprotectinassaybyidsvalidationandcomparisontodiasorinmethod