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 49, Issue 12 (Dec 2011)

Issues

Heterophilic antibody interference in commercial immunoassays; a screening study using paired native and pre-blocked sera

Nils Bolstad / David J. Warren / Johan Bjerner / Gunnhild Kravdal
  • Unit of Medical Biochemistry, Division for Diagnostics and Technology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Lutz Schwettmann / Kari H. Olsen / Pål Rustad / Kjell Nustad
Published Online: 2011-09-08 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2011.702

Abstract

Background: Heterophilic antibodies are still an important source of interference in immunoassays. We have conducted a screening study for interference in a panel of commercially available assays using two sera known to contain high titer Fc-reactive heterophilic antibodies.

Methods: The sera were distributed to laboratories participating in the Nordic External Quality Assessment cooperation (EQANord). Duplicate samples pre-blocked with aggregated murine monoclonal MAK33 were also supplied. Discrepancies (>50%) between the results for native and blocked samples were used to classify the tested assays as susceptible to interference. A total of 170 different assay kits covering 91 analytes were tested.

Results: We found that 21 assays, covering 19 different analytes, were susceptible to interference from the heterophilic antibodies in the two sera. Many of these are clinically and commercially important assays. Some of the false results were grossly elevated and could have been detrimental to patient care in a clinical setting.

Conclusions: Heterophilic antibodies with Fc-reactivity remain a threat. A more widespread use of antibody fragments and aggregated immunoglobulin could potentially improve the heterophilic antibody resistance of assays intended for clinical use.

This article offers supplementary material which is provided at the end of the article.

Keywords: HAMAs; heterophile antibody; heterophilic; interference; immunoassay

About the article

Corresponding author: Nils Bolstad, Department of Medical Biochemistry, Oslo University Hospital, Radiumhospitalet, 0310 Oslo, Norway Phone: +47 22935107, Fax: +47 22730725


Received: 2011-06-20

Accepted: 2011-08-05

Published Online: 2011-09-08

Published in Print: 2011-12-01


Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM), ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2011.702.

Export Citation

©2011 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston. This content is open access.

Supplementary Article Materials

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]
Pilar I Beato-Víbora and S Alejo-González
International Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, 2016, Volume 15, Number 1
[2]
Michael E. Lassman, Thomas McAvoy, Derek L. Chappell, Anita Y. Lee, Xuemei X. Zhao, and Omar F. Laterza
Clinica Chimica Acta, 2016, Volume 459, Page 155
[3]
Shiva Mongolu, Annie E. Armston, Erin Mozley, and Azraai Nasruddin
Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation, 2016, Volume 76, Number 3, Page 240
[4]
Giulia M. Sancesario and Sergio Bernardini
Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences, 2015, Volume 52, Number 6, Page 314
[5]
Martin Schwickart, Inna Vainshtein, Rozanne Lee, Amy Schneider, and Meina Liang
Bioanalysis, 2014, Volume 6, Number 14, Page 1939
[6]
Giuseppe Lippi, Luigi Ippolito, Maria Teresa Tondelli, and Emmanuel J. Favaloro
Blood Coagulation & Fibrinolysis, 2014, Volume 25, Number 3, Page 277
[7]
Agata Burska, Marjorie Boissinot, and Frederique Ponchel
Mediators of Inflammation, 2014, Volume 2014, Page 1
[8]
Giuseppe Lippi, Rosalia Aloe, Tiziana Meschi, Loris Borghi, and Gianfranco Cervellin
Clinica Chimica Acta, 2013, Volume 426, Page 79
[9]
Nils Bolstad, David J. Warren, and Kjell Nustad
Best Practice & Research Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2013, Volume 27, Number 5, Page 647
[10]
Christian D. Peters, Bente Jespersen, and Rikke Nørregaard
Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation, 2012, Volume 72, Number 8, Page 583
[11]
Marianne S. Nordlund, Petra Stieber, Odd Terje Brustugun, David J. Warren, and Elisabeth Paus
Tumor Biology, 2012, Volume 33, Number 4, Page 1105
[12]
Krystyna Sztefko and Patrycja Szybowska
International Journal of Endocrinology, 2012, Volume 2012, Page 1
[13]
Irene Areström, Bartek Zuber, Theresa Bengtsson, and Niklas Ahlborg
Journal of Immunological Methods, 2012, Volume 379, Number 1-2, Page 23

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in