首页> 外文期刊>Clinica chimica acta: International journal of clinical chemistry and applied molecular biology >Comparison between two commercially available chromogranin A assays in detecting neuroendocrine differentiation in prostate cancer and benign prostate hyperplasia.
【24h】

Comparison between two commercially available chromogranin A assays in detecting neuroendocrine differentiation in prostate cancer and benign prostate hyperplasia.

机译:两种市售嗜铬粒蛋白A检测试剂盒在检测前列腺癌和良性前列腺增生中的神经内分泌分化方面的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Chromogranin A (CgA) is the neuroendocrine (NE) marker most frequently employed in detecting NE differentiation in prostate cancer patients, either at the tissue level or in the general circulation. METHODS: We compared the two commercially CgA assay kits in detecting NE differentiation, in benign hyperplasia (BPH) or prostate cancer (PC) patients (pts). 170 pts with BPH, 107 with BPH+inflammation, and 136 PC pts entered the study. CgA was measured in each patient with the immunoradiometric assay (IRMA) and with the enzyme-linked immunoabsorbent assay (ELISA). RESULTS: A moderate relationship was found between CgA measured with IRMA and ELISA in the whole population (Spearman's R=0.65, p<0.05), in BPH pts (R=0.76, p<0.05), in BPH+inflammation pts (R=0.53, p<0.05) and in PC pts (R=0.60, p<0.05). Twenty-two out of 62 pts (35.4%) with elevated ELISA CgA did not have increased IRMA CgA; by contrast, 21/61 pts (34.4%) with elevated IRMA CgA were not recognized as abnormal by the ELISA kit. CONCLUSIONS: CgA measured by the two assays provided a significant discordance rate, suggesting that the two kits might elicit different information.
机译:背景:嗜铬粒蛋白A(CgA)是神经内分泌(NE)标记,最常用于检测前列腺癌患者在组织水平或全身循环中的NE分化。方法:我们比较了两种商业CgA检测试剂盒在良性增生(BPH)或前列腺癌(PC)患者(pts)中检测NE分化的情况。参加本研究的有BPH的170分,有BPH +炎症的107分和136 PC分。使用免疫放射测定法(IRMA)和酶联免疫吸附测定法(ELISA)在每位患者中测量CgA。结果:在整个人群中,用IRMA测定的CgA与ELISA之间存在适度的相关性(Spearman R = 0.65,p <0.05),BPH pts(R ​​= 0.76,p <0.05),BPH +炎症pts(R ​​= 0.53,p <0.05)和PC pts(R ​​= 0.60,p <0.05)。 ELISA CgA升高的62名患者中有22名(35.4%)的IRMA CgA没有增加;相比之下,ELISA试剂盒未将21/61分(34.4%)的IRMA CgA升高视为异常。结论:通过两种测定法测量的CgA提供了显着的不一致率,表明这两种试剂盒可能引起不同的信息。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号