Evaluation of second generation CA 125 assays

Ermelando V. Cosmi, Giuseppe Atlante, Claudio Donadio, Luciano Mariani, Antonella Barbati

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: This study was performed in order to evaluate and compare the serum CA 125 values obtained using an immunoradiometric (IRMA-II) and an immunoenzymatic (ETI-II) second generation assay, and to establish whether or not the two methods may be used interchangeably. Study design: Serum CA 125 levels were measured in parallel using IRMA-II and ETI-II CA 125 assays (Sorin Biomedica), in 82 women with benign or malignant gynecological diseases. Statistical analysis was performed by linear regression analysis and Wilcoxon's test. Results: Serum CA 125 levels measured using the immunoenzymatic method were lower than those obtained by the immunoradiometric assay. The largest discrepancies between the two methods were found at concentrations of 35-100 U/ml, within which fall cutoff values for the immunoradiometric assay. The cutoff values of 35 or 65 U/ml, frequently used in the original immunoradiometric assay and retained for the immunoradiometric second generation assay, corresponded to 18 and 47 U/ml in the immunoenzymatic second generation assay. Conclusion: The discrepancies in CA 125 results obtained by the two detection methods imply that the cutoff values used in the immunoenzymatic procedure should have a lower reference value in order to eliminate high rates of false negative results. Furthermore, their interchangeable use should be avoided in the monitoring of ovarian cancer and other gynecological diseases.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)73-76
Number of pages4
JournalEuropean Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Volume58
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1995

Fingerprint

Immunoradiometric Assay
assays
Serum
Ovarian Neoplasms
Linear Models
ovarian neoplasms
Reference Values
Regression Analysis
methodology
normal values
regression analysis
statistical analysis
experimental design
monitoring
testing

Keywords

  • CA 125
  • Second generation assay
  • Serum

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology
  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

Cite this

Evaluation of second generation CA 125 assays. / Cosmi, Ermelando V.; Atlante, Giuseppe; Donadio, Claudio; Mariani, Luciano; Barbati, Antonella.

In: European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Vol. 58, No. 1, 1995, p. 73-76.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cosmi, Ermelando V. ; Atlante, Giuseppe ; Donadio, Claudio ; Mariani, Luciano ; Barbati, Antonella. / Evaluation of second generation CA 125 assays. In: European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 1995 ; Vol. 58, No. 1. pp. 73-76.
@article{8ca78a891fc74a308c2260c1d3fba6d2,
title = "Evaluation of second generation CA 125 assays",
abstract = "Objective: This study was performed in order to evaluate and compare the serum CA 125 values obtained using an immunoradiometric (IRMA-II) and an immunoenzymatic (ETI-II) second generation assay, and to establish whether or not the two methods may be used interchangeably. Study design: Serum CA 125 levels were measured in parallel using IRMA-II and ETI-II CA 125 assays (Sorin Biomedica), in 82 women with benign or malignant gynecological diseases. Statistical analysis was performed by linear regression analysis and Wilcoxon's test. Results: Serum CA 125 levels measured using the immunoenzymatic method were lower than those obtained by the immunoradiometric assay. The largest discrepancies between the two methods were found at concentrations of 35-100 U/ml, within which fall cutoff values for the immunoradiometric assay. The cutoff values of 35 or 65 U/ml, frequently used in the original immunoradiometric assay and retained for the immunoradiometric second generation assay, corresponded to 18 and 47 U/ml in the immunoenzymatic second generation assay. Conclusion: The discrepancies in CA 125 results obtained by the two detection methods imply that the cutoff values used in the immunoenzymatic procedure should have a lower reference value in order to eliminate high rates of false negative results. Furthermore, their interchangeable use should be avoided in the monitoring of ovarian cancer and other gynecological diseases.",
keywords = "CA 125, Second generation assay, Serum",
author = "Cosmi, {Ermelando V.} and Giuseppe Atlante and Claudio Donadio and Luciano Mariani and Antonella Barbati",
year = "1995",
doi = "10.1016/0028-2243(94)01974-C",
language = "English",
volume = "58",
pages = "73--76",
journal = "European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology",
issn = "0028-2243",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of second generation CA 125 assays

AU - Cosmi, Ermelando V.

AU - Atlante, Giuseppe

AU - Donadio, Claudio

AU - Mariani, Luciano

AU - Barbati, Antonella

PY - 1995

Y1 - 1995

N2 - Objective: This study was performed in order to evaluate and compare the serum CA 125 values obtained using an immunoradiometric (IRMA-II) and an immunoenzymatic (ETI-II) second generation assay, and to establish whether or not the two methods may be used interchangeably. Study design: Serum CA 125 levels were measured in parallel using IRMA-II and ETI-II CA 125 assays (Sorin Biomedica), in 82 women with benign or malignant gynecological diseases. Statistical analysis was performed by linear regression analysis and Wilcoxon's test. Results: Serum CA 125 levels measured using the immunoenzymatic method were lower than those obtained by the immunoradiometric assay. The largest discrepancies between the two methods were found at concentrations of 35-100 U/ml, within which fall cutoff values for the immunoradiometric assay. The cutoff values of 35 or 65 U/ml, frequently used in the original immunoradiometric assay and retained for the immunoradiometric second generation assay, corresponded to 18 and 47 U/ml in the immunoenzymatic second generation assay. Conclusion: The discrepancies in CA 125 results obtained by the two detection methods imply that the cutoff values used in the immunoenzymatic procedure should have a lower reference value in order to eliminate high rates of false negative results. Furthermore, their interchangeable use should be avoided in the monitoring of ovarian cancer and other gynecological diseases.

AB - Objective: This study was performed in order to evaluate and compare the serum CA 125 values obtained using an immunoradiometric (IRMA-II) and an immunoenzymatic (ETI-II) second generation assay, and to establish whether or not the two methods may be used interchangeably. Study design: Serum CA 125 levels were measured in parallel using IRMA-II and ETI-II CA 125 assays (Sorin Biomedica), in 82 women with benign or malignant gynecological diseases. Statistical analysis was performed by linear regression analysis and Wilcoxon's test. Results: Serum CA 125 levels measured using the immunoenzymatic method were lower than those obtained by the immunoradiometric assay. The largest discrepancies between the two methods were found at concentrations of 35-100 U/ml, within which fall cutoff values for the immunoradiometric assay. The cutoff values of 35 or 65 U/ml, frequently used in the original immunoradiometric assay and retained for the immunoradiometric second generation assay, corresponded to 18 and 47 U/ml in the immunoenzymatic second generation assay. Conclusion: The discrepancies in CA 125 results obtained by the two detection methods imply that the cutoff values used in the immunoenzymatic procedure should have a lower reference value in order to eliminate high rates of false negative results. Furthermore, their interchangeable use should be avoided in the monitoring of ovarian cancer and other gynecological diseases.

KW - CA 125

KW - Second generation assay

KW - Serum

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028985537&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028985537&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0028-2243(94)01974-C

DO - 10.1016/0028-2243(94)01974-C

M3 - Article

VL - 58

SP - 73

EP - 76

JO - European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology

JF - European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology

SN - 0028-2243

IS - 1

ER -