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


     

Clinical Chemistry 41: 1022-1027, 1995;
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 Rosano, T. G.
Right arrow Articles by Leinung, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rosano, T. G.
Right arrow Articles by Leinung, M.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 41, 1022-1027, Copyright © 1995 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Clinical and analytical evaluation of an immunoradiometric assay for corticotropin

TG Rosano, LM Demers, R Hillam, MT Dybas and M Leinung
Department of Pathology, Albany Medical Center, NY 12208, USA.

We evaluated a new IRMA developed commercially for the measurement of corticotropin (ACTH) in human plasma. The assay involves purified polyclonal goat capture antibodies specific for ACTH 26-39 and an 125I- labeled monoclonal signal antibody specific for ACTH 1-17. CVs for intraassay and total precision at ACTH concentrations between 9 and 801 ng/L ranged from 2.5% to 4.7% and from 3.3% to 9.3%, respectively, with an assay detection limit of 1.7 ng/L. The reference interval determined for adults with the new method (16-52 ng/L) differed significantly (P < 0.05) from that for an established ACTH IRMA (9-54 ng/L). Method comparison with clinical samples (n = 179) revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.970 and a best-fit equation of y (new IRMA) = (1.011 +/- 0.019)x + (4.17 +/- 3.31) with Sylx = 40.2. Both methods showed equivalent clinical sensitivity in evaluating Cushing disease, adrenal tumors, ectopic ACTH-producing tumors, hypopituitarism, steroid suppression, surgical adrenalectomy, Nelson syndrome, Addison disease, and corticotropin-releasing hormone stimulation. We conclude that the new IRMA is technically simple to perform and provides a specific and sensitive method for evaluating of adrenocortical function.


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


Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
M. Vogeser, D. Engelhardt, and K. Jacob
Comparison of Two Automated Adrenocorticotropic Hormone Assays
Clin. Chem., December 1, 2000; 46(12): 1998 - 2000.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
G. Kertesz, B. Bourcier, H. Cailla, and F. Jean
Immunoradiometric assay of succinylated corticotropin: an improved method for quantification of ACTH
Clin. Chem., January 1, 1998; 44(1): 78 - 85.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1995 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.