Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
Published in Association with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)
Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario
Ed. by Gillery, Philippe / Lackner, Karl J. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Melichar, Bohuslav / Schlattmann, Peter / Tate, Jillian R.
IMPACT FACTOR increased in 2015: 3.017
Rank 5 out of 30 in category Medical Laboratory Technology in the 2014 Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report/Science Edition
SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.873
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.982
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 2.238
Validation of commercial assays for measurements of trefoil factor family peptides in serum
1Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Volume 49, Issue 12, Pages 2057–2060, ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.2011.712, September 2011
- Published Online:
Background: Trefoil peptides (TFF1, TFF2 and TFF3) are 7–12 kDa molecules, secreted by mucin-producing epithelial cells. Increased serum concentrations have been reported in a number of pathological conditions, which warrants the need for validated commercially available assays.
Methods: We validated commercial assays for TFF1-3 and compared results obtained with our in-house assays, using serum from blood donors.
Results: Level of detection was: ≤0.008 nmol/L. Measuring ranges were: 0.032–0.51 (TFF1), 0.038–0.76 (TFF2) and 0.019–0.15 (TFF3) nmol/L. Imprecision (CV), judged from the measurement of serum pools in two levels, was below 9% (TFF2 and TFF3) but up to 18% (mean 0.41 nmol/L) for TFF1. No cross reactivity between the TFFs (concentrations >100 nmol/L) was observed. The 95% non-parametric reference intervals were: <0.0032–0.53 (TFF1), 0.099–1.4 (TFF2) and 0.086–0.87 (TFF3) nmol/L. Comparing commercial to in-house assays (n=132), showed biases explained by differences in the calibrators (TFF1 and TFF2). A number of samples showed markedly different results.
Conclusions: The commercial assays for TFF2 and TFF3 are acceptable for use on serum samples, while the TFF1 assay revealed a poor imprecision and a too narrow measuring range. Results obtained with the commercial and the in-house assays differed, partly because of differences in the calibrators employed.