Robustness of CSF Aß42/40 and Aß42/P-tau181 measured using fully automated immunoassays to detect AD-related outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: This study investigated the comparability of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cutoffs for Elecsys immunoassays for amyloid beta (Aß)42/Aß40 or Aß42/phosphorylated tau (p-tau)181 and the effects of measurement variability when predicting Alzheimer's disease (AD)-related outcomes (i.e., Aß-positron emission tomography [PET] visual read and AD neuropathology). METHODS: We studied 750 participants (BioFINDER study, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative [ADNI], and University of California San Francisco [UCSF]). Youden's index was used to identify cutoffs and to calculate accuracy (Aß-PET visual read as outcome). Using longitudinal variability in Aß-negative controls, we identified a gray zone around cut-points where the risk of an inconsistent predicted outcome was >5%. RESULTS: For Aß42/Aß40, cutoffs across cohorts were <0.059 (BioFINDER), <0.057 (ADNI), and <0.058 (UCSF). For Aß42/p-tau181, cutoffs were <41.90 (BioFINDER), <39.20 (ADNI), and <46.02 (UCSF). Accuracy was ≈90% for both Aß42/Aß40 and Aß42/p-tau181 using these cutoffs. Using Aß-PET as an outcome, 8.7% of participants fell within a gray zone interval for Aß42/Aß40, compared to 4.5% for Aß42/p-tau181. Similar findings were observed using a measure of overall AD neuropathologic change (7.7% vs. 3.3%). In a subset with CSF and plasma Aß42/40, the number of individuals within the gray zone was ≈1.5 to 3 times greater when using plasma Aß42/40. DISCUSSION: CSF Aß42/p-tau181 was more robust to the effects of measurement variability, suggesting that it may be the preferred Elecsys-based measure in clinical practice and trials.

An accurate fully automated panel of plasma biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: There is a great need for fully automated plasma assays that can measure amyloid beta (Aß) pathology and predict future Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. METHODS: Two cohorts (n = 920) were examined: Panel A+ (n = 32 cognitively unimpaired [CU], n = 106 mild cognitive impairment [MCI], and n = 89 AD) and BioFINDER-1 (n = 461 CU, n = 232 MCI). Plasma Aß42/Aß40, phosphorylated tau (p-tau)181, two p-tau217 variants, ApoE4 protein, neurofilament light, and GFAP were measured using Elecsys prototype immunoassays. RESULTS: The best biomarker for discriminating Aß-positive versus Aß-negative participants was Aß42/Aß40 (are under the curve [AUC] 0.83-0.87). Combining Aß42/Aß40, p-tau181, and ApoE4 improved the AUCs significantly (0.90 to 0.93; P< 0.01). Adding additional biomarkers had marginal effects (ΔAUC ≤0.01). In BioFINDER, p-tau181, p-tau217, and ApoE4 predicted AD dementia within 6 years in CU (AUC 0.88) and p-tau181, p-tau217, and Aß42/Aß40 in MCI (AUC 0.87). DISCUSSION: The high accuracies for Aß pathology and future AD dementia using fully automated instruments are promising for implementing plasma biomarkers in clinical trials and clinical routine.

Accuracy Validation of the Elecsys HBsAg II Quant Assay and Its Utility in Resolving Equivocal Qualitative HBsAg Results.

Background and Objectives: There are reports of false qualitative HBsAg results, because of various causes, such as samples with low HBsAg concentrations that may produce false positives. The main aims of this study were to validate the analytical accuracy and to assess the utility of the Elecsys assay compared to that of the qualitative HbsAg assay as a screening test in resolving equivocal qualitative HbsAg results. Materials and Methods: The limit of blank (LoB), the limit of detection (LoD), the limit of quantification (LoQ), and linearity were estimated to validate the analytical accuracy of the Elecsys HBsAg II Quant assay. A total of 449 serum samples showing initial equivocal results (1-50 index) were evaluated by Elecsys HBsAg II Quant and ADVIA Centaur HBsAg II assays. Results: The LoQ of the assay was determined to be 0.050 IU/mL, as provided by the manufacturer. The Kappa agreement between the two assays was almost perfect, at 0.9669, despite seven discordant results. With a specificity of 100% at new cut-off index value ≥5.42, about 78 samples (17%, 78/449) with index value ≥5.42 were interpreted as positives without further duplicate tests, however the remaining 371 samples with index value <5.42 need to be confirmed with additional HBV marker assays. Conclusions: We confirm that the Elecsys HBsAg II Quant assay is accurate and sensitive for HBV infection and recommend it as an alternative confirmatory HBsAg assay for resolving equivocal qualitative HBsAg results.

Interpretations of SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibody titers in the seroepidemiological study of asymptomatic healthy volunteers.

INTRODUCTION: The usefulness of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody tests in asymptomatic individuals has not been well validated, although they have satisfied sensitivity and specificity in symptomatic patients. In this study, we investigated the significance of IgM and IgG antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 in the serum of asymptomatic healthy subjects. METHODS: From June 2020, we recruited 10,039 participants to the project named the University of Tokyo COVID-19 Antibody Titer Survey (UT-CATS), and measured iFlash-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG (YHLO IgM and IgG) titers in the collected serum. For the samples with increased IgM or IgG titers, we performed additional measurements using Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Ig (Roche total Ig) and Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Abbott IgG) and investigated the reactivity to N, S1, and receptor binding domain (RBD) proteins. RESULTS: After setting the cutoff value at 5 AU/mL, 61 (0.61%) were positive for YHLO IgM and 104 (1.04%) for YHLO IgG. Few samples with elevated YHLO IgM showed reactivity to S1 or RBD proteins, and IgG titers did not increase during the follow-up in any samples. The samples with elevated YHLO IgG consisted of two groups: one reacted to S1 or RBD proteins and the other did not, which was reflected in the results of Roche total Ig. CONCLUSIONS: In SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiological studies of asymptomatic participants, sufficient attention should be given to the interpretation of the results of YHLO IgM and IgG, and the combined use of YHLO IgG and Roche total Ig might be more reliable.

Comparison of IL-6 measurement methods with a special emphasis on COVID-19 patients according to equipment and sample type.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is a multifunctional cytokine associated with various diseases, including coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Although IL-6 levels can be assessed using serum samples, use of the AFIAS (Boditech Med Inc.) automated immunoassay analyzer enables quick and simple measurement of IL-6 levels in both serum and whole blood specimens. This study aimed to assess the correlation between IL-6 measurements obtained from the AFIAS IL-6 assay and Elecsys IL-6 assay (Roche Diagnostics). Additionally, utilization of the AFIAS IL-6 assay was evaluated. METHODS: The IL-6 levels from 113 serum samples quantified using two assay systems were evaluated for their degree of correlation. Meanwhile, the linearity, analytical sensitivity, and precision/reproducibility of the AFIAS IL-6 assay were also assessed. RESULTS: Quantification of IL-6 with the AFIAS IL-6 and Elecsys IL-6 assays showed excellent agreement (kappa 0.802) and were found to be correlated (y = -0.2781 + 1.068x; 95% confidence interval: 1.007-1.124). AFIAS IL-6 showed good analytical performances. IL-6 levels were significantly higher in deceased patients compared to those with non-complicated disease and those who were intubated (p = 0.002 and p < 0.0001, respectively). Finally, IL-6 levels more accurately predicted poor prognosis in patients, than did C-reactive protein (area under the curve, 0.716 vs. 0.634). CONCLUSION: The overall analytical performance of the AFIAS assay was comparable to that of the Elecsys IL-6 assay. In light of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the AFIAS may be an attractive tool for measuring IL-6 levels.

Analytical Performance of the Sysmex HISCL HBsAg Assay and Comparison with the Roche Elecsys HBsAg II Quant Assay in the Quantification of Hepatitis B Surface Antigen.

Background and Objectives: This study aims to estimate the analytical performance of the Sysmex HISCL HBsAg assay and to assess the analytical correlation with the Roche Elecsys HBsAg II quant assay with clinical samples and the WHO International Standard (IS). Materials and Methods: The intra-assay precision, linearity, assay limitation, accuracy, and comparative evaluation of the HISCL HBsAg assay were estimated. Results: Extrapolating from the plot of the average total allowable error versus the reference value, an accuracy goal of 20% would be achieved around a limit of quantification (LoQ) of 0.014867 IU/mL. The percentage of biases for each level of the WHO IS measured by the two assays were less than 15%, except for the WHO 3rd IS, for which the HISCL HBsAg assay achieved a percentage of bias of 33%. In the comparative evaluation, Passing-Bablok regression analysis did not reveal any significant deviation from linearity between the two assays (y = -48.6998 + 1.9206x; p = 0.79 by the CUSUM test for linearity). The mean difference of the quantitative HBsAg level between the two assays was 1762.5 IU/mL in the Bland-Altman plot. Conclusions: The HISCL HBsAg assay, with a highly sensitive LoQ of 0.03 IU/mL, showed similar analytical performance in HBsAg quantification to the Elecsys HBsAg II quant assay and may be helpful in obtaining better diagnoses and therapeutic strategies for treating HBV infections.

Time-dependent changes in the seroprevalence of COVID-19 in asymptomatic liver disease outpatients in an area in Japan undergoing a second wave of COVID-19.

AIM: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a serious public health concern, with unclarified prevalence in Japan. Concomitant liver disease could increase the severity of COVID-19 disease, and chronic liver disease patients sometimes require frequent admission and gastrointestinal endoscopy. Thus, clarifying the prevalence of asymptomatic COVID-19 in outpatients with liver disease is essential for preventing nosocomial infections. We aimed to clarify the time-dependent changes in COVID-19 seroprevalence in liver disease outpatients, who were asymptomatic for COVID-19, in an area of Japan experiencing a second wave of COVID-19. METHODS: We included the preserved sera of 100, 300, and 300 consecutive liver disease outpatients, who were asymptomatic for COVID-19, from May 2019, March 2020, and May 2020, respectively. The sera were analyzed immunochromatographically to detect immunoglobulin G against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (KURABO) and by Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2-assay (Roche Diagnostics). RESULTS: Analysis of 100 cases from May 2019, before COVID-19 became pandemic, revealed that the specificity of immunochromatographic tests and Elecsys were 98% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93-99.8%) and 100% (95% CI, 97-100%), respectively. Analysis of 300 cases from March 2020 revealed a seroprevalence of 0.3% (1/300; 95% CI, 0-1.8%) for COVID-19 by Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay. Analysis of 300 cases from May 2020 revealed a seroprevalence of 0% (0/300; 95% CI, 0-1.0%). CONCLUSIONS: The Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay has high specificity. The cumulative seroprevalence of COVID-19 by the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay in outpatients with liver disease in Sapporo, who were asymptomatic for COVID-19, was 0.17% (1/600; 95% CI, 0.0-0.9%) until May 2020.

The evaluation of low cut-off index values of Elecsys® HIV combi PT assay in predicting false-positive results.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the results of different cut-off index (COI) values of Elecsys® HIV combi PT assay and to assess the role of COI in reducing the frequency of false-positive results. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of samples analyzed by Elecsys® HIV combi PT assay, a 4th-generation ECLIA, between 2016 and 2017. A total amount of 379 122 samples were collected for HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) screening. RESULTS: A total of 379 122 samples were analyzed. 2528 (0.67%) were positive by Elecsys® HIV combi PT. Of these, 468 were false-positive results, and most of them (94.87%) were in samples with 1 < COI < 15. The false-positive rate was 0.12%. Patients with false-positive samples were more distributed in elder (P < .001) and female (P < .001) than true-positive specimens. The median COI in true-positive specimens was (385.20), which is significantly higher than false-positive specimens (2.08). The consistency between Elecsys® HIV combi PT assay and 3rd-generation and positive predictive value (PPV) increased with higher COI values. Cancer, infection, and neurological diseases were considered the potential confounding factors of HIV false-positive results (19.44%, 11.11%, and 6.62%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Samples with low COI values, especially those contain confounding factors, need to be further scrutinized to determine whether the confounding factors may cause false-positive problem. In addition, the hypothesis that low COI values may predict false-positive results is valid.

Comparison of three commercially available placental growth factor-based tests in women with suspected preterm pre-eclampsia: the COMPARE study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of three placental growth factor (PlGF)-based tests in predicting delivery within 14 days from testing in women with suspected preterm pre-eclampsia before 35 weeks' gestation. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of samples collected from three prospective pregnancy cohort studies. Participants were pregnant women with suspected preterm pre-eclampsia recruited in tertiary maternity units in the UK and Ireland. Samples were analyzed simultaneously according to the manufacturers' directions. The tests compared were the DELFIA Xpress PlGF 1-2-3 test, the Triage PlGF test and the Elecsys immunoassay soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFlt-1)/PlGF ratio. Areas under receiver-operating characteristics curves (AUCs) were compared. The main outcome measure was detection of a difference of 0.05 in AUC between tests for delivery within 14 days of testing. RESULTS: Plasma samples from 396 women and serum samples from 244 women were assayed. In predicting delivery within 14 days secondary to suspected pre-eclampsia prior to 35 weeks' gestation, no significant differences were observed in AUCs (P = 0.795), sensitivities (P = 0.249), positive predictive values (P = 0.765) or negative predictive values (P = 0.920) between the three tests. The specificity of the Elecsys sFlt-1/PlGF ratio test was higher than that of the other two tests (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The tests perform similarly in their prediction of need for delivery within 14 days in women with suspected pre-eclampsia. The high negative predictive values support the role of PlGF-based tests as 'rule-out' tests for pre-eclampsia. © 2018 Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Falsely elevated plasma ACTH levels measured by the Elecsys assay related to heterophilic antibody in a case of secondary adrenocortical insufficiency.

A 49-year-old woman with membranous nephropathy was referred to our hospital during the tapering of oral prednisolone, because of suspicion of primary adrenal insufficiency based on a plasma ACTH level of 399.1 pg/mL in the Elecsys assay and a serum cortisol level of 3.1 µg/dL. A rapid ACTH stimulation test revealed a suboptimal response, whereas a prolonged ACTH simulation test showed a sufficient increase in her urinary free cortisol. Also, big ACTH was not detected by gel exclusion chromatography. Therefore, we speculated that ACTH levels were falsely elevated due to some interference substances. Pretreatment of her plasma with either polyethylene glycol precipitation or a heterophilic blocking tube substantially reduced her ACTH values. When either the Immulite ACTH II or the TOSOH II ACTH was tried instead of the Elecsys ACTH, her plasma ACTH values turned out to be lower and appropriate for her clinical status. These results indicated that heterophilic antibodies interfered only with the Elecsys ACTH assay presumably by bridging the capture and tracer antibodies. To our knowledge, this is the first case in which the Elecsys ACTH assay yielded falsely elevated results. Regardless of the measurement system used, if there is a discordance between assay results and clinical findings, it should be considered to adopt additional procedures and/or another assay.

Performance evaluation of the mindray anti-HCV assay for the detection of hepatitis C virus infection.

BACKGROUND: Anti-hepatitis C virus (anti-HCV) antibody assays are recommended for HCV infection screening. The Mindray anti-HCV assay, based on a third-generation immunoassay, was recently launched in China. We aimed to evaluate its diagnostic performance compared with that of two other widely used assays. METHODS: Six HCV infection seroconversion panels were used to evaluate the sensitivity of the assay for early detection. A total of 1952 clinical samples were tested by the Mindray anti-HCV, Elecsys anti-HCV II, and Architect anti-HCV assays. Samples with reactive results using at least one anti-HCV assay were further tested with the recombinant immunoblot assay (RIBA). Inconsistent results were investigated by the HCV RNA assay and HCV core antigen assay. HCV infection diagnosis was made according to the results of laboratory tests and medical records. RESULTS: The Mindray anti-HCV assay and Elecsys anti-HCV II assay detected seroconversion in an average of 12.5 days and 10.5 days, respectively, and this difference was not significant (P = .818). Of the 1952 cases, 90 were categorized as "HCV infection" and 1862 were categorized as "no HCV infection." The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (LR+), and negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of each assay were as follows: the Mindray anti-HCV assay, 95.6%, 99.2%, 85.1%, 99.8%, 118.6 and 0.045, respectively; the Architect anti-HCV assay, 98.9%, 95.2%, 50.0%, 99.9%, 20.69 and 0.012, respectively; and the Elecsys anti-HCV II assay, 96.7%, 99.9%, 98.9%, 99.8%, 1799.9 and 0.033, respectively. There were significant differences in the specificity, PPV and LR+ among the three assays (P < .001). There were no significant differences in the sensitivity, NPV or LR- among the three assays (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: The Mindray anti-HCV assay displays a similar sensitivity to the Elecsys anti-HCV II assay with respect to the early detection of HCV infection. The Mindray anti-HCV assay shows excellent diagnostic performance and is suitable for the screening of HCV infection.

Retrospective analysis on the diagnostic performances and signal-to-cut-off ratios of the Elecsys Anti-HCV II assay.

BACKGROUND: Anti-HCV assays are widely used as a screening tool for HCV infection. However, diagnostic performances and effective signal-to-cut-off ratios (S/COs) for predicting true HCV infections would vary according to the assays used. Thus, we evaluated the diagnostic performances of the new Elecsys Anti-HCV assay. METHODS: A total of 41 694 cases tested by the Elecsys Anti-HCV II assay (Roche Diagnostics, Germany) during January 2013 to December 2015 were retrospectively analyzed by comparing with the diagnosis on HCV infections determined by patients' medical records and results of laboratory tests. RESULTS: Excluding 62 cases with unclear history of HCV infection, 430 and 41 202 cases were respectively assorted as "true infection" and "no evidence of infection," and 99.85% of the initial results by the Elecsys assay were concordant with the diagnosis on HCV infection. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were respectively 99.30%, 99.86%, 88.04%, and 99.99%, where the prevalence of the HCV infection was 1.0%. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve value of the Elecsys assay was 0.9980 (95% confidence interval [CI]=0.9944 to 1.0017). The S/CO by the Elecsys assay for predictive of a true-positive ≥95% of the time was 19.0 (95% CI=15.0 to 25.1). CONCLUSION: The Elecsys Anti-HCV II assay showed excellent diagnostic performances, particularly in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and NPV. However, the results obtained by this assay with S/CO less than a certain value would need to be retested by HCV RNA PCR or another anti-HCV assay.

Evaluation of Sensitivity and Specificity Performance of Elecsys HTLV-I/II Assay in a Multicenter Study in Europe and Japan.

Screening of blood for human T-cell lymphotropic virus type 1 and type 2 (HTLV-1 and -2, respectively) is important to diagnose and prevent infection and ensure the safety of blood supplies. The Elecsys HTLV-I/II assay is a newly developed, electrochemiluminescence screening assay for the detection of HTLV-1/2 infection. The sensitivity and specificity of the Elecsys HTLV-I/II assay were determined using well-characterized HTLV-1/2-positive serum and plasma samples and routine diagnostic and blood donor samples expected to be HTLV negative, respectively. These results were compared with those for at least one of the following CE-marked assays at seven independent laboratories and the Roche Diagnostics facility in Penzberg, Germany: Abbott Architect rHTLV-I/II, Ortho Avioq HTLV-I/II Microelisa system, Abbott Prism HTLV-I/HTLV-II, and DiaSorin Murex HTLV I+II. Fujirebio INNO-LIA HTLV-I/II Score was used as a confirmatory assay. The Elecsys HTLV-I/II, Abbott Architect rHTLV-I/II, and Abbott Prism HTLV-I/HTLV-II assays detected all HTLV-1/2-positive samples (sensitivity, 100%). Sensitivity for Ortho Avioq HTLV-I/II was 98.63%. The Elecsys HTLV-I/II assay had a specificity of 99.95% in blood donor samples, which was comparable to results for the other assays (range, 99.91 to 100%). In routine diagnostic samples, the specificity of the Elecsys HTLV-I/II assay was 99.83%, compared with 99.70% for Abbott Architect rHTLV-I/II. Specificity for the Elecsys HTLV-I/II assay in potentially cross-reactive samples was 100%, compared with 99.0% for Ortho Avioq HTLV-I/II and 99.2% for DiaSorin Murex HTLV I+II. The Elecsys HTLV-I/II assay has the sensitivity and specificity to support its use as a routine screening assay for detecting HTLV infection.

Accuracy of cerebrospinal fluid Aß1-42 measurements: evaluation of pre-analytical factors using a novel Elecsys immunosassay.

BACKGROUND: A decreased level of Aß1-42 in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is characteristic of Alzheimer disease and often used to support clinical diagnosis. The measured concentration of CSF Aß1-42, however, depends strongly on several pre-analytical and analytical "confounding" factors such as sample collection, material of testing tube, CSF handling and storage procedures (e.g. transfer to new tubes after centrifugation, freeze-thaw effects). As a consequence, substantial variations in the measured levels of this biomarker are observed even for the same sample. This study investigates whether the accuracy of quantitative analysis of CSF Aß1-42 can be improved by pre-analytical treatment of CSF with agents that could potentially reduce a freeze-thaw and adhesion-related depletion of Aß1-42 from CSF, including modulators of Aß aggregation and cryoprotecting or anti-adhesion agents. METHODS: The concentration of CSF Aß1-42 was assessed with a novel Elecsys immunoassay developed for quantification of Aß1-42 in human CSF. RESULTS: Low-molecular weight Aß oligomerization inhibitors, ß-sheet breaker peptides, or the mid domain 4G8 antibody do not improve the stability of CSF Aß1-42 during a repeated freeze-thaw treatment. Cryoprotecting agents reduce a freeze-thaw dependent loss of Aß1-42 only when spiked to CSF to final concentration of 300 mM or higher. Adhesion of Aß1-42 can be prevented by pre-treating CSF with Tween or by using tubes with a siliconized surface. CONCLUSIONS: Between-center variability in measured level of CSF Aß1-42 can be reduced only by standardized CSF collection into one specific tube that, without centrifugation, transfer or other types of pre-analytical processing, is directly analyzed after sample collection.

New AMH assay allows rapid point of care measurements of ovarian reserve.

In this study, we compare two commercial automated immunoassays used to evaluate serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels as a prognostic value for ovarian response and pregnancy outcome in assisted reproductive technology cycles. Serum AMH was measured for 193 women. We performed a simultaneous measurement in serum AMH with the two alternative kits VIDAS® and Elecsys® AMH assay. For all women undergoing in vitro fertilization cycle, we collected data on their antral follicle count (AFC) and numbers of retrieved cumulus oocyte complexes (OC) and metaphase II oocytes and pregnancy outcome. The AMH values provided by VIDAS® were correlated with the values obtained with Elecsys® (0.977 for fresh and 0.971 for the frozen samples). For both assays AMH exhibited a moderate positive correlation with AFC, OC and MII oocytes (0.612, 0.674, 0.605 for VIDAS® and 0.570, 0.617, 0.530 for Elecsys®, respectively). AMH prediction of biochemical and clinical pregnancy was similar. The present results suggest that the VIDAS® AMH assay is broadly comparable to the Elecsys-AMH assay in terms of technical performance for clinical or epidemiological use. Both automated assays performed in a similar way and the choice of assay can be made depending on the technical configuration of each laboratory.

Clinical utility of different anti-Müllerian hormone - AMH assays for the purpose of pregnancy prediction.

PURPOSE: Comparison of outcomes of IVF cycles where the AMH levels was measured with five different AMH kits: Immunotech (IOT), Beckman Coulter II Gen. RUO, Beckman Coulter II Gen. IVD (BC II IVD), Ansh Labs ultrasensitive (Ansh) and the automated Elecsys Roche assay. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of clinical data for 3693 cycles. RESULTS: In women < 35 years with low (<0.6 ng/ml) and high (>1.4 ng/ml) AMH concentrations, and in those > 39 years with medium (≥0.6 and ≤1.4 ng/ml) and high AMH concentrations the clinical pregnancy rate differed significantly among groups of patients whose AMH level was measured with different kits. In those subgroups, the highest rates were recorded for the BC II IVD and Ansh groups, while the lowest in the IOT group. AMH concentrations differed significantly between different kits in all age groups (the highest in each age group was for the IOT kit and the lowest for BC II IVD). AMH correlates positively with antral follicle count, MII and number of oocytes retrieved. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that we could expect very different pregnancy rates with the same AMH results depending on the AMH kit used. That would means, different values of AMH could similarly lead to misleading clinical decisions in IVF.

Comparison of Elecsys Anti-HCV II Assay With Other HCV Screening Assays.

OBJECTIVE: Early detection of hepatitis C virus (HCV) is an important step in preventing progression to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Serologic assays for anti-HCV antibody are valuable first-line tests in the screening and diagnosis of HCV infection. This study's aim was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of Elecsys Anti-HCV II assay for HCV screening. DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 1,044 routine sera, 20 known HCV-positive samples, plus 54 preselected weakly positive samples were tested for anti-HCV with Elecsys Anti-HCV II assay, Elecsys Anti-HCV assays, InTec HCV enzymoimmunoassay (EIA), and Livzon Anti-HCV EIA. Interference test was assessed with additional 423 specimens without clinical evidence of HCV infection: preselected HCV weak reactive samples; dialysis samples; anti-HBc (antibody to HBV core antigen) (+), anti-Treponema pallidum (+), and anti-HIV (+) sera; and samples form autoimmune/alcoholic hepatitis or systemic Lupus erythematosus (SLE). Discrepant results were evaluated with recombinant immunoblot assay. The seroconversion panels were evaluated to assess how early each assay could detect HCV infection. RESULTS: The specificity (99.81%) of the Elecsys Anti-HCV II assay was less than that with the two EIA comparison methods. However, false-negative results were easily seen in the EIA assays. When serial bleeds of HCV panels were compared with the above-mentioned methods, the assay detected acute HCV infection only 3.5 days after a positive HCV-RNA nucleic acid test and earlier than the comparator assays. CONCLUSION: Sensitivities and specificities of the anti-HCV assays were sufficiently high for use in this study. The Elecsys Anti-HCV II assay is suitable for screening and reliable early detection of HCV infection.

Performance evaluation of two immunoassays for 25-hydroxyvitamin D.

Although immunoassays in measuring 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] have been improved recently, relatively large differences are still seen between results of 25(OH)D measured by immunoassays and by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). In the present studies, we compared two immunoassays with LC-MS/MS for measuring 25(OH)D concentrations. Concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D2 [25(OH)D2] and 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 [25(OH)D3] in serum samples from 59 healthy subjects were measured by two immunoassays including Siemens ADVIA Centaur Vitamin D Total (Centaur) and Roche Elecsys Vitamin D Total (Elecsys) and LC-MS/MS. To determine the cross reactivity of Elecsys and Centaur toward 25(OH)D2, a dosage of 200,000 IU vitamin D2 was given after first sampling. Serum samples were obtained 30 days later and concentrations of 25(OH)D2 and 25(OH)D3 were measured again. The results showed poor agreement between the immunoassays and LC-MS/MS in 25(OH)D2 and 25(OH)D3 measurements. The percentage of 25(OH)D2 cross-reactivity was 45.3% for Centaur and 41.2% for Elecsys and there was no significant difference between Centaur and Elecsys. In conclusion, Centaur and Elecsys perform unsatisfactorily in measuring 25(OH)D levels, especially for 25(OH)D2 cross-reactivity. Therefore, clinicians need to be aware of the underestimation of vitamin D status when using these immunoassays for measuring individuals supplemented with vitamin D2.