Evaluation of the Unicel™ DxI 800 immunoassay analyzer in measuring five tumor markers

Yonsei Medical Journal

Volumn 53, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 557-564

  Park, Younhee ^a   Park, Yongjung ^b   Park, Jungyong ^b   Kim, Hyon Suk ^b  

^a Kwandong University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^b Yonsei University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Alpha fetoprotein (AFP); CA 125; CA 15 3; CA 19 9; Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA); Tumor markers

Indexed keywords

ALPHA FETOPROTEIN; CA 125 ANTIGEN; CA 15-3 ANTIGEN; CA 19-9 ANTIGEN; CARCINOEMBRYONIC ANTIGEN;

ACCURACY; ANTIGEN DETECTION; ARTICLE; CONCENTRATION (PARAMETERS); DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; HUMAN; IMMUNOASSAY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NEOPLASM;

ALPHA-FETOPROTEINS; CA-125 ANTIGEN; CA-19-9 ANTIGEN; CARCINOEMBRYONIC ANTIGEN; HUMANS; IMMUNOASSAY; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 84859785354     PISSN: 05135796     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3349/ymj.2012.53.3.557     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Burtis CA, Ashwood ER, Bruns DE. Tietz textbook of clinical chemistry and molecular diagnostics. 4th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier saunders; 2006.
2. Duffy MJ. Serum tumor markers in breast cancer: are they of clinical value? Clin Chem 2006;52:345-51.
3. Cheli CD, Morris DL, Neaman IE, Dai J, Allard WJ, Yeung KK. Measurement of four tumor marker antigens in the sera of pregnant women. J Clin Lab Anal 1999;13:35-9.
4. Connor S, Bosonnet L, Alexakis N, Raraty M, Ghaneh P, Sutton R, et al. Serum CA19-9 measurement increases the effectiveness of staging laparoscopy in patients with suspected pancreatic malignancy. Dig Surg 2005;22:80-5.
5. Bendardaf R, Lamlum H, Pyrhönen S. Prognostic and predictive molecular markers in colorectal carcinoma. Anticancer Res 2004;24:2519-30.
6. Ishigami S, Natsugoe S, Nakashima H, Tokuda K, Nakajo A, Okumura H, et al. Biological aggressiveness of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP)-positive gastric cancer. Hepatogastroenterology 2006;53: 338-41.
7. Toyoda H, Kumada T, Kiriyama S, Sone Y, Tanikawa M, Hisanaga Y, et al. Prognostic significance of simultaneous measurement of three tumor markers in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006;4:111-7.
8. Delwiche R, Zamcheck N, Marcon N. Carcinoembryonic antigen in pancreatitis. Cancer 1973;31:328-30.
9. Loewenstein MS, Zamcheck N. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels in benign gastrointestinal disease states. Cancer 1978;42(3 Suppl):1412-8.
10. Gebauer G, Müller-Ruchholtz W. Carcinoembryonic antigen and CA19-9: implications of quantitative marker measurement in tissues for prognosis of colorectal cancer. Cancer Detect Prev 2001; 25:344-51.
11. Dungchai W, Siangproh W, Lin JM, Chailapakul O, Lin S, Ying X. Development of a sensitive micro-magnetic chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay for the determination of carcinoembryonic antigen. Anal Bioanal Chem 2007;387:1965-71.
12. Slev PR, Rawlins ML, Roberts WL. Performance characteristics of seven automated CA 15-3 assays. Am J Clin Pathol 2006;125: 752-7.
13. Crombach G, Zippel HH, Würz H. Clinical significance of cancer antigen 125 (CA 125) in ovarian cancer. Cancer Detect Prev 1985;8:135-9.
14. Yagmur E, Driesch R, Gressner AM, Kiefer P. Technical evaluation of the Beckman Coulter OV-Monitor (CA 125 antigen) immunoassay. Clin Chem Lab Med 2006;44:420-2.
15. Deinzer M, Faissner R, Metzger T, Kaminski WE, Löhr M, Neumaier M, et al. Comparison of two different methods for CA19-9 antigen determination. Clin Lab 2010;56:319-25.
16. Lee JH, Park Y, Suh B, Song SM, Kwon OH, Kim JH. Performance characteristics of the UniCel DxI 800 immunoassay for the maternal serum quadruple test, including median values for each week of gestation, in Korean women. Korean J Lab Med 2010;30: 126-32.
17. Passing H, Bablok. A new biometrical procedure for testing the equality of measurements from two different analytical methods. Application of linear regression procedures for method comparison studies in clinical chemistry, Part I. J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 1983;21:709-20.
18. Passing H, Bablok W. Comparison of several regression procedures for method comparison studies and determination of sample sizes. Application of linear regression procedures for method comparison studies in Clinical Chemistry, Part II. J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 1984;22:431-45.
19. Bland JM, Altman DG. Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading. Lancet 1995;346:1085-7.
20. Nicolini A, Carpi A, Michelassi C, Spinelli C, Conte M, Miccoli P, et al. "Tumour marker guided" salvage treatment prolongs survival of breast cancer patients: final report of a 7-year study. Biomed Pharmacother 2003;57:452-9.
21. Mongia SK, Rawlins ML, Owen WE, Roberts WL. Performance characteristics of seven automated CA 125 assays. Am J Clin Pathol 2006;125:921-7.
22. Stern P, Friedecky B, Bartos V, Bezdickova D, Vavrova J, Uhrova J, et al. Comparison of different immunoassays for CA 19-9. Clin Chem Lab Med 2001;39:1278-82.
23. Ognibene A, Drake CJ, Jeng KY, Pascucci TE, Hsu S, Luceri F, et al. A new modular chemiluminescence immunoassay analyser evaluated. Clin Chem Lab Med 2000;38:251-60.
24. Liew M, Groll MC, Thompson JE, Call SL, Moser JE, Hoopes JD, et al. Validating a custom multiplex ELISA against individual commercial immunoassays using clinical samples. Biotechniques 2007;42:327-8, 330-3.