Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Serum free light chain analysis: persisting limitations with new kids on the block.
Van Hoovels, Lieve; Vercammen, Martine; Nevejan, Louis; Cornette, Margot; Briers, Pieter-Jan; Deeren, Dries; Van Droogenbroeck, Jan; Fostier, Karel; De Smet, Dieter.
Afiliação
  • Van Hoovels L; Department of Laboratory Medicine, OLV Hospital Aalst, Aalst, Belgium.
  • Vercammen M; Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
  • Nevejan L; Department of Laboratory Medicine, AZ Sint-Jan Hospital Brugge - Oostende AV, Bruges, Belgium.
  • Cornette M; Research group REIM, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium.
  • Briers PJ; Department of Laboratory Medicine, OLV Hospital Aalst, Aalst, Belgium.
  • Deeren D; Department of Laboratory Medicine, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
  • Van Droogenbroeck J; Department of Laboratory Medicine, AZ Delta Hospital, Roeselare, Belgium.
  • Fostier K; Department of Laboratory Medicine, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.
  • De Smet D; Department of Laboratory Medicine, AZ Sint-Jan Hospital Brugge - Oostende AV, Bruges, Belgium.
Clin Chem Lab Med ; 60(9): 1440-1448, 2022 08 26.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35781357
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

Serum free light chain (sFLC) measurements have inherent analytical limitations impacting sFLC clinical interpretation. We evaluated analytical and diagnostic performance of three polyclonal sFLC assays on four analytical platforms.

METHODS:

sFLC concentration was measured using Diazyme FLC assays (Diazyme) on cobas c501/c503 analyzer (Roche); Freelite assays (The Binding Site) on Optilite analyzer (The Binding Site) and cobas c501 analyzer and Sebia FLC ELISA assays (Sebia) on AP22 ELITE analyzer (DAS). Imprecision, linearity, method comparison vs. Freelite/Optilite, antigen excess detection and reference value verification were assessed. Diagnostic performance was compared on 120 serum samples and on follow-up samples of five patients with κ and λ monoclonal gammopathy.

RESULTS:

Method comparison showed excellent correlation with Freelite/Optilite method for all assays. A large proportional negative bias was shown for both Sebia κ and λ ELISA and a significant positive proportional bias for λ in the low (<10 mg/L) Freelite/cobas c501 method. Clinically relevant underestimation of κ sFLC levels due to antigen excess was shown for 7% of each Diazyme/cobas application and for 11 and 32.1% of λ sFLC assay of respectively Diazyme/cobas and Sebia/AP22. sFLC reference values revealed application specific. Cohen's κ values were (very) good for κ sFLC but only moderate to good for λ sFLC. In 4/10 follow-up patients, significant differences in clinical interpretation between sFLC assays were noticed.

CONCLUSIONS:

Important analytical limitations remain for all sFLC applications. Differences in reference values and diagnostic performance hamper interchangeability of sFLC assays. Assay specific sFLC decision guidelines are warranted.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Paraproteinemias / Cadeias Leves de Imunoglobulina Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Paraproteinemias / Cadeias Leves de Imunoglobulina Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article