Analytical performance and clinical efficacy for cardiovascular risk estimation of an Olympus immunoturbidimetric high-sensitivity C-reactive protein assay

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 44, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 228-231

  Jovičić, Snežana ^a   Ignjatović, Svetlana ^a   Dajak, Marijana ^a   Majkić Singh, Nada ^a  

^a CLINICAL CENTER OF SERBIA   (Serbia)

Author keywords

Atherosclerosis; Cardiovascular disease; High sensitivity C reactive protein, hsCRP; Immunoturbidimetry; Olympus

Indexed keywords

C REACTIVE PROTEIN;

ACCURACY; ANALYTIC METHOD; ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; BLOOD SAMPLING; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; CONCENTRATION (PARAMETERS); CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN DETERMINATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TURBIDIMETRY;

EID: 32544456915     PISSN: 14346621     EISSN: 14346621     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.2006.042     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Rifai N. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein: a useful marker for cardiovascular disease risk prediction and the metabolic syndrome. Clin Chem 2005;51:504-5.
2. Panteghini M. Biochemical markers of cardiac diseases. Jugoslovenska Medicinska Biohemija 2004;23:201-11.
3. Pearson TA, Mensah GA, Alexander RW, Anderson JL, Cannon RO III, Criqui M, et al. Markers of inflammation and cardiovascular disease: application to clinical and public health practice: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Heart Association. Circulation 2003;107:499-511.
4. Roberts WL, Sedrick R, Moulton L, Spencer A, Rifai N. Evaluation of four automated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein methods: implication for clinical and epidemiological applications. Clin Chem 2000;46:461-8.
5. Roberts WL, Moulton L, Law TC, Farrow G, Cooper AM, 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.
6. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;i:307-10.
7. Martin RF. General Deming regression for estimating systematic bias and its confidence interval in method-comparison studies. Clin Chem 2000;46:100-4.
8. Ledue TB, Rifai N. Preanalytic and analytic sources of variations in C-reactive protein measurement: implications for cardiovascular disease risk assessment. Clin Chem 2003;49:1258-71.
9. Kringle RO, Bogovich M. Statistical procedures. In: Burtis CA, Ashwood ER, editors. Tietz textbook of clinical chemistry, 3rd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1999: 303-4.
10. Hamwi A, Vukovich T, Wagner O, Rumpold H, Spies R, Sich M, et al. Evaluation of turbidimetric high-sensitivity C-reactive protein assays for cardiovascular risk estimation. Clin Chem 2001;47:2044-6.
11. Rothkrantz-Kos S, Schmitz MP, Bekers O, Menheere PP, Dieijen VM. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein methods examined. Clin Chem 2002;48:359-62.
12. 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.
13. Lolekha PH, Chittamma A, Roberts WL, Sritara P, Cheepudomwit S, Suriyawongpaisal P. Comparative study of two automated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein methods in a large population. Clin Biochem 2005;38:31-5.
14. Devleeschouwer N, Libeer JC, Chapelle JP, Struway CL, Gyssels C, L'Hoir A, et al. Factors influencing between-laboratory variability of C-reactive protein results as evidenced by the Belgian External Quality Assessment (EQA) scheme. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1994;54:435-40.
15. Kimberly MM, Vesper HW, Caudill SP, Cooper GR, Rifai N, Dati F, et al. Standardization of immunoassays for measurement of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. Phase I: evaluation of secondary reference materials. Clin Chem 2003;49:611-6.