Multiple inflammatory biomarker detection in a prospective cohort study: a cross-validation between well-established single-biomarker techniques and an electrochemiluminescense-based multi-array platform.
BACKGROUND: In terms of time, effort and quality, multiplex technology is an attractive alternative for well-established single-biomarker measurements in clinical studies. However, limited data comparing these methods are available. METHODS: We measured, in a large ongoing cohort study (n = 574), by...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2013-01-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3589355?pdf=render |
id |
doaj-3116915614c34f39b2699972240e64c3 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-3116915614c34f39b2699972240e64c32020-11-25T02:42:37ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032013-01-0183e5857610.1371/journal.pone.0058576Multiple inflammatory biomarker detection in a prospective cohort study: a cross-validation between well-established single-biomarker techniques and an electrochemiluminescense-based multi-array platform.Bas C T van BusselIsabel FerreiraMarjo P H van de WaarenburgMarleen M J van GreevenbroekCarla J H van der KallenRonald M A HenryEdith J M FeskensCoen D A StehouwerCasper G SchalkwijkBACKGROUND: In terms of time, effort and quality, multiplex technology is an attractive alternative for well-established single-biomarker measurements in clinical studies. However, limited data comparing these methods are available. METHODS: We measured, in a large ongoing cohort study (n = 574), by means of both a 4-plex multi-array biomarker assay developed by MesoScaleDiscovery (MSD) and single-biomarker techniques (ELISA or immunoturbidimetric assay), the following biomarkers of low-grade inflammation: C-reactive protein (CRP), serum amyloid A (SAA), soluble intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (sICAM-1) and soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (sVCAM-1). These measures were realigned by weighted Deming regression and compared across a wide spectrum of subjects' cardiovascular risk factors by ANOVA. RESULTS: Despite that both methods ranked individuals' levels of biomarkers very similarly (Pearson's r all≥0.755) absolute concentrations of all biomarkers differed significantly between methods. Equations retrieved by the Deming regression enabled proper realignment of the data to overcome these differences, such that intra-class correlation coefficients were then 0.996 (CRP), 0.711 (SAA), 0.895 (sICAM-1) and 0.858 (sVCAM-1). Additionally, individual biomarkers differed across categories of glucose metabolism, weight, metabolic syndrome and smoking status to a similar extent by either method. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple low-grade inflammatory biomarker data obtained by the 4-plex multi-array platform of MSD or by well-established single-biomarker methods are comparable after proper realignment of differences in absolute concentrations, and are equally associated with cardiovascular risk factors, regardless of such differences. Given its greater efficiency, the MSD platform is a potential tool for the quantification of multiple biomarkers of low-grade inflammation in large ongoing and future clinical studies.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3589355?pdf=render |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Bas C T van Bussel Isabel Ferreira Marjo P H van de Waarenburg Marleen M J van Greevenbroek Carla J H van der Kallen Ronald M A Henry Edith J M Feskens Coen D A Stehouwer Casper G Schalkwijk |
spellingShingle |
Bas C T van Bussel Isabel Ferreira Marjo P H van de Waarenburg Marleen M J van Greevenbroek Carla J H van der Kallen Ronald M A Henry Edith J M Feskens Coen D A Stehouwer Casper G Schalkwijk Multiple inflammatory biomarker detection in a prospective cohort study: a cross-validation between well-established single-biomarker techniques and an electrochemiluminescense-based multi-array platform. PLoS ONE |
author_facet |
Bas C T van Bussel Isabel Ferreira Marjo P H van de Waarenburg Marleen M J van Greevenbroek Carla J H van der Kallen Ronald M A Henry Edith J M Feskens Coen D A Stehouwer Casper G Schalkwijk |
author_sort |
Bas C T van Bussel |
title |
Multiple inflammatory biomarker detection in a prospective cohort study: a cross-validation between well-established single-biomarker techniques and an electrochemiluminescense-based multi-array platform. |
title_short |
Multiple inflammatory biomarker detection in a prospective cohort study: a cross-validation between well-established single-biomarker techniques and an electrochemiluminescense-based multi-array platform. |
title_full |
Multiple inflammatory biomarker detection in a prospective cohort study: a cross-validation between well-established single-biomarker techniques and an electrochemiluminescense-based multi-array platform. |
title_fullStr |
Multiple inflammatory biomarker detection in a prospective cohort study: a cross-validation between well-established single-biomarker techniques and an electrochemiluminescense-based multi-array platform. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Multiple inflammatory biomarker detection in a prospective cohort study: a cross-validation between well-established single-biomarker techniques and an electrochemiluminescense-based multi-array platform. |
title_sort |
multiple inflammatory biomarker detection in a prospective cohort study: a cross-validation between well-established single-biomarker techniques and an electrochemiluminescense-based multi-array platform. |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS ONE |
issn |
1932-6203 |
publishDate |
2013-01-01 |
description |
BACKGROUND: In terms of time, effort and quality, multiplex technology is an attractive alternative for well-established single-biomarker measurements in clinical studies. However, limited data comparing these methods are available. METHODS: We measured, in a large ongoing cohort study (n = 574), by means of both a 4-plex multi-array biomarker assay developed by MesoScaleDiscovery (MSD) and single-biomarker techniques (ELISA or immunoturbidimetric assay), the following biomarkers of low-grade inflammation: C-reactive protein (CRP), serum amyloid A (SAA), soluble intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (sICAM-1) and soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (sVCAM-1). These measures were realigned by weighted Deming regression and compared across a wide spectrum of subjects' cardiovascular risk factors by ANOVA. RESULTS: Despite that both methods ranked individuals' levels of biomarkers very similarly (Pearson's r all≥0.755) absolute concentrations of all biomarkers differed significantly between methods. Equations retrieved by the Deming regression enabled proper realignment of the data to overcome these differences, such that intra-class correlation coefficients were then 0.996 (CRP), 0.711 (SAA), 0.895 (sICAM-1) and 0.858 (sVCAM-1). Additionally, individual biomarkers differed across categories of glucose metabolism, weight, metabolic syndrome and smoking status to a similar extent by either method. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple low-grade inflammatory biomarker data obtained by the 4-plex multi-array platform of MSD or by well-established single-biomarker methods are comparable after proper realignment of differences in absolute concentrations, and are equally associated with cardiovascular risk factors, regardless of such differences. Given its greater efficiency, the MSD platform is a potential tool for the quantification of multiple biomarkers of low-grade inflammation in large ongoing and future clinical studies. |
url |
http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3589355?pdf=render |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT basctvanbussel multipleinflammatorybiomarkerdetectioninaprospectivecohortstudyacrossvalidationbetweenwellestablishedsinglebiomarkertechniquesandanelectrochemiluminescensebasedmultiarrayplatform AT isabelferreira multipleinflammatorybiomarkerdetectioninaprospectivecohortstudyacrossvalidationbetweenwellestablishedsinglebiomarkertechniquesandanelectrochemiluminescensebasedmultiarrayplatform AT marjophvandewaarenburg multipleinflammatorybiomarkerdetectioninaprospectivecohortstudyacrossvalidationbetweenwellestablishedsinglebiomarkertechniquesandanelectrochemiluminescensebasedmultiarrayplatform AT marleenmjvangreevenbroek multipleinflammatorybiomarkerdetectioninaprospectivecohortstudyacrossvalidationbetweenwellestablishedsinglebiomarkertechniquesandanelectrochemiluminescensebasedmultiarrayplatform AT carlajhvanderkallen multipleinflammatorybiomarkerdetectioninaprospectivecohortstudyacrossvalidationbetweenwellestablishedsinglebiomarkertechniquesandanelectrochemiluminescensebasedmultiarrayplatform AT ronaldmahenry multipleinflammatorybiomarkerdetectioninaprospectivecohortstudyacrossvalidationbetweenwellestablishedsinglebiomarkertechniquesandanelectrochemiluminescensebasedmultiarrayplatform AT edithjmfeskens multipleinflammatorybiomarkerdetectioninaprospectivecohortstudyacrossvalidationbetweenwellestablishedsinglebiomarkertechniquesandanelectrochemiluminescensebasedmultiarrayplatform AT coendastehouwer multipleinflammatorybiomarkerdetectioninaprospectivecohortstudyacrossvalidationbetweenwellestablishedsinglebiomarkertechniquesandanelectrochemiluminescensebasedmultiarrayplatform AT caspergschalkwijk multipleinflammatorybiomarkerdetectioninaprospectivecohortstudyacrossvalidationbetweenwellestablishedsinglebiomarkertechniquesandanelectrochemiluminescensebasedmultiarrayplatform |
_version_ |
1724772645003591680 |