Evaluation of two new high-sensitivity methods for C-reactive protein

Annals of Clinical Biochemistry

Volumn 40, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 398-405

  Rothkrantz Kos, Snježana ^a   Bekers, Otto ^a   Gubbels, Armand ^a   Drent, Marjolein ^a   Schmitz, Maria P J ^a   Van Dieijen Visser, Marja P ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

C REACTIVE PROTEIN;

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; BLOOD CHEMISTRY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN BLOOD LEVEL; RELIABILITY; STANDARDIZATION;

BLOOD DONORS; C-REACTIVE PROTEIN; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; NEPHELOMETRY AND TURBIDIMETRY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0037667117     PISSN: 00045632     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/000456303766477057     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Ridker PM, Cushman M, Stampfer MJ, Tracy RP, Hennekens CH. Inflammation, aspirin, and the risk of cardiovascular disease in apparently healthy men. N Engl J Med 1997; 336: 973-9
2. Ridker PM, Hennekens CH, Buring JE, Rifai N. C-reactive protein and other markers of inflammation in the prediction of cardiovascular disease in women. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 836-43
3. Rifai N, Ridker PM. Proposed cardiovascular risk assessment algorithm using high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and lipid screening. Clin Chem 2001; 47: 28-30
4. Campbell B, Badrick T, Flatman R, Kanowski D. Limited clinical utility of high-sensitivity plasma C-reactive protein assays. Ann Clin Biochem 2002; 39: 85-8
5. Roberts WL, Sedrick R, Moulton L, Spencer A, Rifai N. Evaluation of four automated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein methods: implications for clinical and epidemiological applications. Clin Chem 2000; 46: 461-8
6. Roberts WL, Moulton L, Law TC, Farrow G, Copper-Anderson M, Savory J, et al. Evaluation of nine automated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein methods: implications for clinical and epidemiological applications. Part 2. Clin Chem 2001; 47: 418-25
7. Hamwi A, Vukovich T, Wagner O, Rumpold H, Spies R, Stich M, et al. Evaluation of turbidimetric high-sensitivity C-reactive protein assays for cardiovascular risk estimation. Clin Chem 2001; 47: 2044-6
8. Ledue TB, Rifai N. High sensitivity immunoassays for C-reactive protein: promises and pitfalls. Clin Chem Lab Med 2001; 39: 1171-6
9. Rothkrantz-Kos S, Schmitz MP, Bekers O, Menheere PP, van Bieijen-Visser MP. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein methods examined. Clin Chem 2002; 48: 359-62
10. Hutchinson WL, Koenig W, Frohlich M, Sund M, Lowe GD, Pepys MB. Immunoradiometric assay of circulating C-reactive protein: age-related values in the adult general population. Clin Chem 2000; 46: 934-8
11. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; i: 307-10
12. Pollock MA, Jefferson SG, Kane JW, Lomax K, MacKinnon G, Winnard CB. Method comparison: a different approach. Ann Clin Biochem 1992; 29: 556-60
13. Martin RF. General deming regression for estimating systematic bias and its confidence interval in method-comparison studies. Clin Chem 2000; 46: 100-4
14. Solberg H. Establishment and use of reference values. In: Burtis CA, Ashwood ER, eds. Tietz Textbook of Clinical Chemistry. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1994: 470-6
15. Hollis S. Analysis of method comparison studies. Ann Clin Biochem 1996; 33: 1-4
16. Macy EM, Hayes TE, Tracy RP. Variability in the measurement of C-reactive protein in healthy subjects: implications for reference intervals and epidemiological applications. Clin Chem 1997; 43: 52-8
17. Ockene IS, Matthews CE, Rifai N, Ridker PM, Reed G, Stanek E. Variability and classification accuracy of serial high-sensitivity C-reactive protein measurements in healthy adults. Clin Chem 2001; 47: 444-50