Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

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 2016: 3.432

CiteScore 2016: 2.21

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 1.000
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 1.112

Online
ISSN
1437-4331
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 44, Issue 1 (Jan 2006)

Issues

Analytical performance of a new two-step ADVIA Centaur® estradiol immunoassay during ovarian stimulation

Catherine Massart
  • Laboratoire de Génétique Moléculaire et Hormonologie, CHU de Pontchaillou, Rennes, France and UPRES EA 3889, Université de Rennes 1, Rennes, France
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Jacqueline Gibassier / Marie-Christine Laurent / Dominique Le Lannou
Published Online: 2011-09-21 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2006.020

Abstract

Measurement of estradiol is useful in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET). The analytical performance of a new two-step estradiol assay (ADVIA Centaur® estradiol-6 III from Bayer Diagnostics) was evaluated in 41 sera from 11 women undergoing ovarian stimulation. The results were compared to those obtained with two radioimmunoassays (RIAs; RIA Estradiol Immunotech IM 1663 from Beckmann Coulter and Coat-A-Count Estradiol from Diagnostic Products Corporation) and with one chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA; ADVIA Centaur® estradiol-6). The ADVIA Centaur® estradiol-6 III assay was the most sensitive assay, with a functional sensitivity of 55pmol/L. Within- and between-run coefficients of variation calculated for the new ADVIA Centaur® assay ranged from 3.3% to 9%, which was better than the precision obtained for the other assays. A dilution test showed serum interferences when estradiol was measured in non-diluted samples. No statistical difference was observed between the estradiol results obtained in diluted sera with the new two-step ADVIA Centaur® assay and those measured with the Immunotech RIA and the other CLIA. In conclusion, this new, two-step estradiol assay performed on the ADVIA Centaur® system displays suitable sensitivity, precision and intermethod agreement with the Immunotech RIA for the measurement of serum estradiol concentrations in women undergoing ovarian stimulation and IVF-ET. For correct linearity, estradiol measurement should be performed on diluted samples.

Keywords: estradiol; immunoassay; ovarian stimulation; sensitivity

References

  • 1.

    Vargyas JM, Marrs RP, Kletzky OA, Mishell DR Jr. Correlation of ultrasonic measurement of ovarian follicle size and serum estradiol levels in ovulatory patients following clomifene citrate for in vitro fertilization. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982; 144:569–73.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 2.

    Fossum GT, Vermesh M, Kletzky OA. Biochemical and biophysical indices of follicular development in spontaneous and stimulated ovulatory cycles. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 75:407–11.Google Scholar

  • 3.

    Sushanek E, Huderer K, Dobec D, Hlavati V, Simunic V, Grizelj V. Number of follicles, oocytes and embryos in human in vitro fertilization is relative to serum estradiol and progesterone patterns during different types of ovarian hyperstimulation. Eur Gynecol Reprod Biol 1994: 56:121–7.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 4.

    Hugues EG, Fedorkow DM, Daya S, Sagle MA, Van de Koppel P, Collins JA. The routine use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists prior to in vitro fertilization and gamete intra-Fallopian transfer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Fertil Steril 1992; 58:888–96.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 5.

    Schioler V, Thode J. Six direct radioimmunoassay of estradiol evaluated. Clin Chem 1988; 34:949–52.Google Scholar

  • 6.

    Tummon I, Stemp J, Rose C, Vanderberghe H, Bany B, Tekpetey F, et al. Precision and method bias of two assays for estradiol: consequences for decisions in assisted reproduction. Hum Reprod 1999: 14:1175–7.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 7.

    Taieb J, Benattar C, Birr AS, Lindenbaum A. Limitations of steroid determination by direct immunoassay. Clin Chem 2002; 48:583–5.Google Scholar

  • 8.

    Spencer CA, Takeuchi M, Kararosyan M. Current status and performance goals for serum thyrotropin (TSH) assays. Clin Chem 1996; 43:140–5.Google Scholar

  • 9.

    Yuzpe AA, Nisker JA, Kaplan BR, Tummon IS, Auckland J. Nafarelin acetate for down regulation in in vitro fertilization. J Reprod Med 1995; 40:83–8.Google Scholar

  • 10.

    Taieb J, Benattar C, Diop R, Birr AS, Lindenbaum A. Use of the Architect-i2000 estradiol immunoassay during in vitro fertilization. Clin Chem 2003; 49:183–6.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 11.

    Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1:307–10.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 12.

    Mikkelsen AL, Borggaard B, Lebech PE. Results of serial measurement of estradiol in serum with six different methods during ovarian stimulation. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1996; 41:35–40.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 13.

    Lee CS, Smith NM, Kahn SN. Analytical variability and clinical significance of different assays for serum estradiol. J Reprod Med 1991; 36:156–60.Google Scholar

  • 14.

    Anttila L, Koskinen P, Irjala K, Kaihola HL. Reference intervals for serum sex steroids and gonadotropins in regularly menstruating women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1991; 70:475–81.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 15.

    Potischman N, Falk RT, Laiming VA, Siiteri PK, Hoover RN. Reproducibility of laboratory assays for steroid hormones and sex hormone-binding globulin. Cancer Res 1994; 54;5363–7.Google Scholar

  • 16.

    Buttner J. Philosophy of measurement by means of immunoassays. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1991; 205:11–20.Google Scholar

About the article

Corresponding author: Catherine Massart, Laboratoire de Génétique Moléculaire et Hormonologie, CHU de Pontchaillou, rue Le Guilloux, 35043 Rennes, France Fax: +33-299-284-145,


Received: 2005-08-18

Accepted: 2005-10-18

Published Online: 2011-09-21

Published in Print: 2006-01-01


Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM), ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2006.020.

Export Citation

©2006 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin New York. Copyright Clearance Center

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in