Isomer-Specific Assay of 2,4-D Herbicide Products by HPLC: Regulatory Methodology

2021 ◽  
pp. 91-109
Author(s):  
Timothy S. Stevens
Keyword(s):  
Specific Assay

scholarly journals Direct comparison of performance characteristics of two immunoassays for bone isoform of alkaline phosphatase in serum

1997 ◽  
Vol 43 (11) ◽  
pp. 2052-2057 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher P Price ◽  
Thomas P Milligan ◽  
Claude Darte
Keyword(s):  
Alkaline Phosphatase ◽  
Reference Range ◽  
Cross Reactivity ◽  
Performance Characteristics ◽  
Paget Disease ◽  
Specific Assay ◽  
Comparison Of Results ◽  
Immunometric Assay ◽  
Detailed Evaluation ◽  
Electrophoretic Procedure

Abstract A clinical need exists for a sensitive and specific assay for the quantitation of the bone isoform of alkaline phosphatase in serum. The majority of methods do not meet this requirement; however, the recent development of immunoassays for this isoform may provide a solution. In a detailed evaluation of two immunoassays, we found a degree of imprecision that enables the discrimination of changes within the reference range. The cross-reactivity of the liver isoform was found to be between 7.1% and 12.7% when two different methods of assessment were used. The comparison of results with an electrophoretic procedure showed that the immunocapture method recovered less of the bone isoform in samples from children than in samples from patients with Paget disease; no such difference was found with the immunometric method. This suggests that the immunocapture antibody may discriminate between different bone isoforms in children whereas the immunometric assay does not.

A quick and specific assay for hydroxyproline

1973 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 288-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nelly Blumenkrantz ◽  
Gustav Asboe-Hansen
Keyword(s):  
Specific Assay

scholarly journals Natriuretic Peptides and Analytical Barriers

2017 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vlad C Vasile ◽  
Allan S Jaffe
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Natriuretic Peptide ◽  
Natriuretic Peptides ◽  
Myocardial Function ◽  
Specific Assay ◽  
Peptide System ◽  
Cardiovascular Homeostasis ◽  
Natriuretic Peptide System

Abstract BACKGROUND The natriuretic peptide system is an endocrine, autocrine and paracrine system that plays an important role in the maintenance of cardiovascular homeostasis. Biomarkers based on these peptides are important diagnostic and prognostic tools for myocardial function. CONTENT Although natriuretic peptides were discovered more than 2 decades ago, their intricate and complex biology is associated with important questions not yet elucidated. The diversity of circulating forms of natriuretic peptides, the distinct expression of these forms in particular patients, and the heterogeneity of heart failure forms, along with specific assay-related and preanalytic issues, cause assays to be poorly harmonized. SUMMARY This review presents the relevant issues related to the biology of natriuretic peptides and differences between assays with immediate implications for clinical practice.

Specific Assay Methods for Droperidol and Fentanyl Citrate in a Pharmaceutical Combination

1968 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 451-455 ◽  
Author(s):  
Casimir A. Janicki ◽  
Ronald J. Brenner ◽  
Barbara E. Schwartz
Keyword(s):  
Fentanyl Citrate ◽  
Specific Assay ◽  
Assay Methods

Strategies to develop strain-specific PCR based assays for probiotics

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 887-898 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Treven
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Genomics ◽  
Genome Sequencing ◽  
Bacterial Genome ◽  
Probiotic Strain ◽  
Representational Difference Analysis ◽  
Specific Marker ◽  
Suppression Subtractive Hybridisation ◽  
Specific Primers ◽  
Specific Assay ◽  
Specific Pcr

Since health benefits conferred by probiotics are strain-specific, identification to the strain level is mandatory to allow the monitoring of the presence and the abundance of specific probiotic in a product or in a gastrointestinal tract. Compared to standard plate counts, the reduced duration of the assays and higher specificity makes PCR-based methods (standard PCR and quantitative PCR) very appropriate for detection or quantification of probiotics. Development of strain-specific assay consists of 4 main stages: (1) strain-specific marker identification; (2) construction of potential strain-specific primers; (3) validation on DNA from pure cultures of target and related strains; and (4) validation on spiked samples. The most important and also the most challenging step is the identification of strain-specific sequences, which can be subsequently targeted by specific primers or probes. Such regions can be identified on sequences derived from 16S-23S internally transcribed spacers, randomly amplified polymorphic DNA, representational difference analysis and suppression subtractive hybridisation. Already known phenotypic or genotypic characteristics of the target strain can also be used to develop the strain-specific assay. However, the initial stage of strain-specific assay development can be replaced by comparative genomics analysis of target genome with related genomes in public databases. Advances in whole genome sequencing (WGS) have resulted in a cost reduction for bacterial genome sequencing and consequently have made this approach available to most laboratories. In the present paper I reviewed the available literature on PCR and qPCR assays developed for detection of a specific probiotic strain and discussed future WGS and comparative genomics-based approaches.

scholarly journals Kinetics and seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies – a comparison of 3 different assays

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Kahre ◽  
Lukas Galow ◽  
Manja Unrath ◽  
Luise Haag ◽  
Judith Blankenburg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Significant Loss ◽  
Trial Registration ◽  
Specific Assay ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Antibody Levels ◽  
Antibody Kinetics

AbstractPurposeComparing seroprevalence and antibody kinetics in three different commercially available assays for SARS-CoV-2.MethodsSerostatus of COVID-19 patients was analyzed 5 months and 10 months after their infection, using three different assays: Diasorin LIAISON®, Euroimmun®, Abbott Diagnostics® ARCHITECT.ResultsSeropositivity at baseline differed significantly depending on the assay (Diasorin 81%, Euroimmun 83%, Abbott 59%). At follow-up antibody levels detected in the Diasorin assay were stable, while there was a significant loss in seropositivity in the Euroimmun and Abbott assays.ConclusionThere are significant differences in SARS-CoV-2 antibody kinetics based on the specific assay used.Trial registration number, date of registrationDRKS00022549, 29.07.2020 “retrospectively registered”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document