These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of the results for three automated immunoassay systems in determining serum HBV markers.
    Author: Chen Y, Wu W, Li LJ, Lou B, Zhang J, Fan J.
    Journal: Clin Chim Acta; 2006 Oct; 372(1-2):129-33. PubMed ID: 16713592.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Automated immunoassay analyzers are used to identify hepatitis B virus (HBV) serum markers. In regions with high prevalence of HBV, it is imperative to compare test results from different immunoassay analyzers. METHODS: Samples from 496 subjects were collected and HBV markers were determined (double-blind, parallel manner) using Abbott AxSYM, Roche Modular Analytics E170, and Abbott Architect i2000). RESULTS: Concurrence between AxSYM and E170 was 97.78% for HBsAg, 91.13% for anti-HBs, 98.79% for anti-HBc, 98.39% for HBeAg, and 88.91% for anti-HBe. Positive rates of anti-HBs and anti-HBe from AxSYM were lower than E170 (P<0.01). Concurrence between AxSYM and Architect i2000 was 98.79% for HBsAg, 91.33% for anti-HBs, 95.97% for anti-HBc, 98.39% for HBeAg, and 95.77% for anti-HBe. Positive anti-HBs rates from AxSYM were lower than Architect i2000 (P<0.01). Concurrence between E170 and Architect i2000 was 97.38% for HBsAg, 94.15% for anti-HBs, 95.56% for anti-HBc, 99.60% for HBeAg, and 88.10% for anti-HBe. Positive anti-HBe rates using Architect i2000 were lower than E170 (P<0.01). Overall, the greatest differences were observed in samples with low-level serum HBV markers. CONCLUSION: Significant discrepancies were observed among results for the 3 automated immunoassay analyzers, especially for low-level anti-HBs and anti-HBe results.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]