Clinical Chemistry Link to Randox Laboratories Web Site
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 37: 1736-1739, 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 Bormer, O. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bormer, O. P.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 37, 1736-1739, Copyright © 1991 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Major disagreements between immunoassays of carcinoembryonic antigen may be caused by nonspecific cross-reacting antigen 2 (NCA-2)

OP Bormer
Central Laboratory, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo.

Four "sandwich"-type immunoassays of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) based on the use of monoclonal antibodies (Abbott CEA-RIA Monoclonal, Pharmacia/Wallac Delfia CEA kit, Roche CEA EIA Duomab 60, and our in- house immunoradiometric assay) were tested for cross-reaction with nonspecific cross-reacting antigen 2 (NCA-2) in meconium. The Roche assay did not react with NCA-2, but the other three assays cross- reacted strongly and to about the same extent with this antigen. NCA-2 is the CEA gene family member that is structurally most similar to CEA, and other authors have found by indirect evidence that this antigen also is increased in the serum of many cancer patients. In a previous study we found that the Roche assay yielded lower mean values than the other assays for CEA in serum from colorectal cancer patients. Furthermore, the correlation between the Roche CEA values and those of each of the other three assays was weaker than the correlation between these NCA-2 cross-reactive assays. We conclude that these results can be explained by the different cross-reactivity with NCA-2 of the antibodies used by the various assays, as described here. Our findings raise interesting questions regarding the possible role of NCA-2 as a tumor marker.


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


Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
J.-C. Rymer, R. Sabatier, A. Daver, J. Bourleaud, M. Assicot, J. Bremond, J. Rapin, S. L. Salhi, B. Thirion, A. Vassault, et al.
A New Approach for Clinical Biological Assay Comparison and Standardization: Application of Principal Component Analysis to a Multicenter Study of Twenty-One Carcinoembryonic Antigen Immunoassay Kits
Clin. Chem., June 1, 1999; 45(6): 869 - 881.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


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