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


     

Clinical Chemistry 37: 51-57, 1991;
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Price, T.
Right arrow Articles by McNally, A. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Price, T.
Right arrow Articles by McNally, A. J.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 37, 51-57, Copyright © 1991 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Human anti-murine antibody interference in measurement of carcinoembryonic antigen assessed with a double-antibody enzyme immunoassay

T Price, BG Beatty, JD Beatty and AJ McNally
Division of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA 91010.

Fifty-eight plasma specimens from 30 patients who had undergone presurgical radioimmunoscintigraphy with 111In-labeled anti- carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) murine monoclonal antibody (Mab) and who had no clinical evidence of disease after surgical resection showed increased concentrations of CEA (greater than or equal to 5 micrograms/L) in plasma when studied with the previously available commercial CEA enzyme immunoassay (EIA) from Roche. The possible role of anti-murine antibody (HAMA) interference was addressed by adding mouse IgG (mIgG) to the plasma (2 g/L) before assay. Fifteen specimens (26%) showed no change in CEA (reflecting a true increase as shown by the original results), 22 (38%) showed a decrease in CEA of greater than 15% but remained positive (reflecting an artefactual increase), and 21 (36%) became CEA-negative (less than or equal to 5 micrograms/L; reflecting a false increase). Subsequently, we assayed the same samples with a modified version of this CEA EIA kit and 47 specimens remained CEA positive (greater than 5 micrograms/L): 25 (53%) were truly increased, 12 (26%) remained artefactually increased, and 10 (21%) continued to show a false increase. The degree of interference in the original EIA kit correlated with the plasma concentration of HAMA (P less than 0.005). All artefactually and falsely increased CEA values observed in both kits were corrected by addition of polyclonal mIgG or of a mixture of IgG1, IgG2a, and IgG2b Mabs before assay. This correction is important in the follow-up of patients who receive murine Mabs for treatment or diagnosis.


The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:


Home page
 Annals of Clinical & Laboratory ScienceHome page
R. L. Bertholf, L. Johannsen, and G. Benrubi
False Elevation of Serum CA-125 Level Caused by Human Anti-Mouse Antibodies
Ann. Clin. Lab. Sci., October 1, 2002; 32(4): 414 - 418.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
N. Despres and A. M. Grant
Antibody interference in thyroid assays: a potential for clinical misinformation
Clin. Chem., March 1, 1998; 44(3): 440 - 454.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1991 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.