Assessment of new hyaluronic acid assays and their impact on FibroMeter scores
Saved in:
| Title: | Assessment of new hyaluronic acid assays and their impact on FibroMeter scores |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Veillon, Pascal1, Gallois, Yves2 yvgallois@chu-angers.fr, Moal, Valérie2, Fouchard-Hubert, Isabelle3, Charles, Isabelle3, Larcher, Françoise2, Dib, Nina3, Boursier, Jérôme3, Oberti, Frédéric3, Laafi, Jihane3, Guéchot, Jérôme4, Balan, Viorica1, Calès, Paul3, Lunel-Fabiani, Françoise1 |
| Source: | Clinica Chimica Acta. Jan2011, Vol. 412 Issue 3/4, p347-352. 6p. |
| Subjects: | Hyaluronic acid, Biological assay, Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, Fibrosis, Aspartate aminotransferase, Macroglobulins, Carrier proteins, Liver diseases |
| Abstract: | Abstract: Background: We compared three hyaluronic acid (HA) assays and analyzed the impact of their variations on FibroMeter scores. Methods: In a test group of 165 patients, HA levels were assessed with the commonly used ELISA assay from Corgenix, a new ELISA assay from Teco and an immunoturbidimetry assay from Wako, this latter tested across three different instruments. Five different FibroMeter scores were calculated. Results: Correlation across the three assays (rs between 0.969 and 0.995) was very good. Means of differences (d) were lower when the immunoturbidimetry assay was compared on different instruments: d between −3.4 and 2.0μg/L. However, a higher value for HA measurement was observed with Corgenix assay, compared to the other two assays (Teco and Wako): d between 27.1 and 36.4μg/L. The assessment also demonstrated that HA variations had very little impact on FibroMeter scores: 0.0117 for virus and 0.0416 for alcoholic fibrosis scores, and between 0.58 and 1.71 for the area of fibrosis (expressed in percentage). Conclusions: The two new assays found lower values of HA, as compared to the Corgenix assay. However, these differences had very little impact on FibroMeter scores and had no impact on clinical evaluation of liver fibrosis. [Copyright &y& Elsevier] |
| Copyright of Clinica Chimica Acta is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
Be the first to leave a comment!
