Clinical Chemistry AACC Online Job Center
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 35: 138-140, 1989;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an electronic Letter to
the Editor about this paper
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haver, V. M.
Right arrow Articles by Nelson, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Haver, V. M.
Right arrow Articles by Nelson, M.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 35, 138-140, Copyright © 1989 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Four fluorescence polarization immunoassays for therapeutic drug monitoring evaluated

VM Haver, N Audino, S Burris and M Nelson
Laboratory Service, Veterans Administration Medical Center, Seattle, WA 98108.

We evaluated four fluorescence polarization immunoassays--those for phenytoin, procainamide, N-acetylprocainamide (NAPA), and quinidine-- from Roche Diagnostic Systems, done in the Cobas Bio FP centrifugal analyzer. The assays for phenytoin, NAPA, and quinidine demonstrated a linear response over the expected ranges of concentrations, and analytical recovery of test drug added to drug-free sera was greater than 90%. However, recovery in the procainamide assay was poor (69-82%) for samples containing greater than 8 mg/L, owing to nonlinearity. Results of method-comparison studies of the four assays paralleled the recovery studies, although the quinidine assay demonstrated a bias (1.0 mg/L higher) when compared with EMIT (Syva). The precision of the phenytoin assay was acceptable at all concentrations tested (total CV less than 7.0%). Imprecision of the other assays was significant at certain concentrations: total CV greater than 10.0% at subtherapeutic values for NAPA and quinidine, and greater than 9.0% for low (2.4 mg/L) and moderate concentrations (9.6 mg/L) of procainamide. Interferences were not significant for hemolyzed, icteric, or lipemic specimens or for specimens with added drug metabolites. The calibration curves for all four assays had good stability (greater than 60 days).




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1989 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.