Modified and improved anti-acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibody assay: comparison of analytical and clinical performance with conventional anti-AChR antibody assay

We developed a modified anti-acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibody (Ab) assay based on a radioreceptor assay and a calibration curve. We compared the analytical and clinical performances of this modified assay with those of the conventional anti-AChR Ab radioreceptor assay. Serum specimens were fro...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical chemistry (Baltimore, Md.) Md.), 1997-05, Vol.43 (5), p.824-831
Main Authors: Ferrero, Bruno, Aimo, Giuseppe, Pagni, Roberto, Bergamasco, Bruno, Bongioanni, Maria R, Bergamini, Lodovico, Durelli, Luca
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Animals
Autoantibodies - blood
Biological and medical sciences
Cattle
Diseases of striated muscles. Neuromuscular diseases
Female
Humans
Linear Models
Male
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Muscles - chemistry
Myasthenia Gravis - immunology
Neurology
Radioligand Assay - methods
Radioligand Assay - statistics & numerical data
Receptors, Cholinergic - analysis
Receptors, Cholinergic - immunology
Reproducibility of Results
ROC Curve
Sensitivity and Specificity
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We developed a modified anti-acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibody (Ab) assay based on a radioreceptor assay and a calibration curve. We compared the analytical and clinical performances of this modified assay with those of the conventional anti-AChR Ab radioreceptor assay. Serum specimens were from patients with myasthenia gravis (MG) (n = 156) and from control subjects (n = 106). The modified assay demonstrated lower within-assay (4.0-6.6%) and between-assay (5.3-7.8%) CVs, greater linearity, lower cost, and shorter assay time than the conventional method. ROC curve analysis indicated almost identical specificity and sensitivity (> 0.92) for these two anti-AChR Ab assays. The modified and conventional assays were also equivalent for blocking anti-AChR Ab assay. Moreover, the modified anti-AChR Ab assay, differently from the conventional assay, allowed us to reveal anti-AChR Ab concentration differences among different clinical grades of MG.
ISSN:0009-9147
1530-8561
DOI:10.1093/clinchem/43.5.824