Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details

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 / Payne, Deborah A. / Schlattmann, Peter / Tate, Jillian R.

12 Issues per year


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

Online
ISSN
1437-4331
See all formats and pricing

 


Select Volume and Issue

Issues

Technical Performance and Diagnostic Utility of the New Elecsys® Neuron-Specific Enolase Enzyme Immunoassay

Thomas Muley / Werner Ebert / Petra Stieber / Hannelore Raith / Stefan Holdenrieder / Dorothea Nagel / Heinrich Fürst / Hans-Jürgen Roth / Hilmar Luthe / Bert G. Blijenberg / Eberhard Gurr / Wolfgang Uhl / Joachim von Pawel / Peter Drings
Published Online: 2005-06-01 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2003.017

Abstract

This international multicenter study was designed to evaluate the technical performance of the new double-monoclonal, single-step Elecsys neuron-specific enolase (NSE) enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and to assess its utility as a sensitive and specific test for the diagnosis of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Intra- and inter-assay coefficients of variation, determined in five control or serum specimens in six laboratories, ranged from 0.7 to 5.3 (inter-laboratory median: 1.3%) and from 1.3 to 8.5 (inter-laboratory median: 3.4%), respectively. Laboratory-to-laboratory comparability was excellent with respect to recovery and inter-assay coefficients of variation. The test was linear between 0.0 and 320 ng/ml (highest measured concentration). There was a significant correlation between NSE concentrations measured using the Elecsys NSE and the established Cobas Core NSE EIA II in all subjects (n = 723) and in patients with lung cancer (n = 333). However, NSE concentrations were systematically lower (approximately 9%) with the Elecsys NSE than with the comparison test. Based on a specificity of 95% in comparison with the group suffering from benign lung diseases (n = 183), the cut-off value for the discrimination between malignant and benign conditions was set at 21.6 ng/ml. NSE was raised in 73.4% of SCLC patients (n = 188) and was significantly higher (p < 0.01) in extensive (87.8%) as opposed to limited disease (56.7%). NSE was also elevated in 16.0% of the cases with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC, n = 374). It is concluded that the Elecsys NSE EIA is a reliable and accurate diagnostic procedure for the measurement of NSE in serum samples. The special merits of this new assay are the wide measuring range (according to manufacturer's declaration up to 370 ng/ml) and a short incubation time of 18 min.


Published Online: 2005-06-01

Published in Print: 2003-01-27


Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Volume 41, Issue 1, Pages 95–103, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2003.017, June 2005

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Soo-Kyung Kim, Tae-Dong Jeong, Woochang Lee, Sail Chun, and Won-Ki Min
Laboratory Medicine Online, 2015, Volume 5, Number 2, Page 63
[2]
[3]
Jaume Trapé, Xavier Filella, Montse Alsina-Donadeu, Lluïsa Juan-Pereira, Àngels Bosch-Ferrer, and Raül Rigo-Bonnin
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 2011, Volume 49, Number 10
[4]
Eric S. Weiss, Kevin K.W. Wang, Jeremiah G. Allen, Mary E. Blue, Lois U. Nwakanma, Ming Cheng Liu, Mary S. Lange, Jennifer Berrong, Mary Ann Wilson, Vincent L. Gott, Juan C. Troncoso, Ronald L. Hayes, Michael V. Johnston, and William A. Baumgartner
The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 2009, Volume 88, Number 2, Page 543
[5]
Catharina M. Korse, Babs G. Taal, Andrew Vincent, Marie-Louise F. van Velthuysen, Paul Baas, Johanna C.G.M. Buning-Kager, Theodora C. Linders, and Johannes M.G. Bonfrer
European Journal of Cancer, 2012, Volume 48, Number 5, Page 662
[6]
Christel Péqueux, Christophe Breton, Marie-Thérèse Hagelstein, Vincent Geenen, and Jean-Jacques Legros
Lung Cancer, 2005, Volume 50, Number 2, Page 177
[7]
David Brea, Tomás Sobrino, Miguel Blanco, Iván Cristobo, Raquel Rodríguez-González, Manuel Rodríguez-Yañez, Octavio Moldes, Jesús Agulla, Rogelio Leira, and José Castillo
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 2009, Volume 47, Number 12
[8]
Omar F Laterza, Vijay R Modur, and Jack H Ladenson
Biomarkers in Medicine, 2008, Volume 2, Number 1, Page 81
[9]
Patricia Fuchs, Christian Loeseken, Jochen K. Schubert, and Wolfram Miekisch
International Journal of Cancer, 2009, Page NA
[10]
Stefan Moritz, Jan Warnat, Sylvia Bele, Bernhard Martin Graf, and Chris Woertgen
Journal of Neurosurgical Anesthesiology, 2010, Volume 22, Number 1, Page 21
[11]
Petr Stern, Vladimir Bartos, Jana Uhrova, Drahomira Bezdickova, Zdislava Vanickova, Vojtech Tichy, Kveta Pelinkova, Richard Prusa, and Tomas Zima
Tumor Biology, 2007, Volume 28, Number 2, Page 84
[12]
Petr Stern, Vladimir Bartos, Petra Stieber, Karin Hofmann, Jana Uhrova, Drahomira Bezdickova, Zdislava Vanickova, Vojtech Tichy, Kveta Pelinkova, Richard Prusa, and Tomas Zima
Tumor Biology, 2007, Volume 28, Number 1, Page 27

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.