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


     

Clinical Chemistry 37: 1745-1748, 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 Pettersson, K.
Right arrow Articles by Huhtaniemi, I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pettersson, K.
Right arrow Articles by Huhtaniemi, I.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 37, 1745-1748, Copyright © 1991 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Monoclonal antibody-based discrepancies between two-site immunometric tests for lutropin

K Pettersson, YQ Ding and I Huhtaniemi
Department of Physiology, University of Turku, Finland.

We compared five two-site immunometric assays (including three commercially available kits) for measuring lutropin (LH) in serum. Four of the assays involved monoclonal antibodies directed against the alpha- beta dimer, intact LH; these assays measured significantly lower concentrations of LH in 19 (out of 83) samples than did a commercial method not involving such antibodies. In five serum samples, two of the intact LH assays failed to detect any significant immunoreactivity above the detection limit. Findings of normal in vitro LH bioactivity in these samples did not confirm the low immunoreactivity of the intact LH assays. The inability of these assays to detect bioactive LH creates confusion in daily, routine testing as well as in research monitoring of bio/immuno ratios. The data presented here confirm our previous findings (Clin Chem 1991;37:333-40) and emphasize the need to avoid the use of monoclonal antibodies specific for the intact LH dimer.


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


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
A. Olivares, M. Cardenas, C. Timossi, T. Zarinan, V. Diaz-Sanchez, and A. Ulloa-Aguirre
Reactivity of different LH and FSH standards and preparations in the World Health Organization matched reagents for enzyme-linked immunoassays of gonadotrophins
Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2000; 15(11): 2285 - 2291.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
S. D. Jayasena
Aptamers: An Emerging Class of Molecules That Rival Antibodies in Diagnostics
Clin. Chem., September 1, 1999; 45(9): 1628 - 1650.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
A. W. van den Beld, I. T. Huhtaniemi, K. S. L. Pettersson, H. A. P. Pols, D. E. Grobbee, F. H. de Jong, and S. W. J. Lamberts
Luteinizing Hormone and Different Genetic Variants, as Indicators of Frailty in Healthy Elderly Men
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., April 1, 1999; 84(4): 1334 - 1339.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


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