PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 1375874

Mercurochrome interference with the Abbott TDx.

Abstract

The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

W J Castellani. 1992. Mercurochrome interference with the Abbott TDx.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1375874/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Overcoming the hurdle of fluorescent compounds in kinase screening: a case study.

In the field of screening in general and especially in the kinase area, taking into consideration throughput and cost, fluorescence- and luminescence-based assays have been developed as alternatives to radioactivity-based assays. However, fluorescence-based technologies are not devoid of pitfalls. One of the main problems is interference from autofluorescent compounds and the incidence of false-positives as exemplified here with a fluorescence polarization (FP)-based assay. Using the scintillation proximity assay as the in-house standard, we assessed several alternatives to radioactive methods, namely, the amplified luminescent proximity homogeneous assay screen (ALPHAScreen, Perkin-Elmer Life Sciences, Boston, MA), enzyme fragment complementation, FP, and nanofluidics-based fluorescence intensity. Data comparing the sensitivity, robustness, relative sensitivity to autofluorescent compounds, enzyme consumption, and relative costs of each assay for one common kinase are presented. Results obtained seem to favor the nanofluidics mobility shift assay as a method of choice, followed by the direct FP approach, using generic high-molecular-weight phosphate group-binders.

Fluorescence Polarization Immunoassay↗

Stopped-flow fluorescence polarization immunoassay.

A general survey of the analytical application of kinetic methodology in fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA) is presented. Stopped-flow mixing technique (SF) allows the initial rate of the immunochemical reaction between the tracer and the antibody to be obtained, which is used as the analytical parameter instead of the equilibrium signal used in conventional FPIA. The instrumentation required is described and the features of the analytical methods proposed are compared with those obtained by conventional FPIA. The usefulness of SF-FPIA for routine screening in clinical, environmental and food analysis is discussed.

Fluorescence Polarization Immunoassay↗

Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry assay for topiramate analysis in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid: validation and comparison with fluorescence-polarization immunoassay.

SUMMARY: The authors report the development and validation of a liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry assay (LC/MS/MS assay) for the analysis of topiramate (2,3:4,5-bis-o-(-1-methyl)-beta-D-fructopyranose sulfamate) in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Comparison is made with the commercially available fluorescence-polarization immunoassay (FPIA). LC/MS/MS ASSAY: Using the internal standard, 1,2:3,4-bis-o-(1-methylethylidene-alpha-D-galactopyranose sulfamate), a structural isomer, the calibration curve in plasma was linear in the concentration range of 0.02-20.0 mg/L (r(2) = 0.9998). The coefficients of variation in plasma were < or = 3%, and the accuracy ranged from 100% to 101% in the therapeutically relevant concentration range of 0.4-16.0 mg/L. In CSF, the mean recovery was 98%, and there was linearity between the nominal and the estimated concentration in the range of 1.5-20.0 mg/L (r(2)= 0.9996). FPIA: The calibration curve was linear in the concentration interval of 1.6-24.3 mg/L (r(2) = 0.9994), and the mean recovery was 96%. Accuracy in plasma was 99- 104%, and precision was 3.2-6.0%. In CSF, there was linearity between the nominal concentration and the estimated concentration in the range of 1.5-20.0 mg/L (r(2) = 0.9995), and the mean recovery was 100%. COMPARISON BETWEEN FPIA AND LC/MS/MS: There was a high correlation between the FPIA and the LC/MS/MS assay (r(2) = 0.9965 in plasma and r(2) = 0.9996 in CSF, P < 0.001 for both). In plasma and CSF, the two methods showed equal results, evaluated as the ratio between the two methods (plasma: median ratio = 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.02, paired-sample test, P = 0.79; and CSF: median ratio = 1.00, 95% CI, 0.99-1.02, paired-sample test, P = 0.75). The coefficient of variation on the ratios between the two methods had similar levels: 5% in plasma and 3% in CSF. CONCLUSION: The new LC/MS/MS assay has favorable characteristics, being highly precise and accurate. FPIA also proved precise and accurate, and there was a high agreement with the LC/MS/MS assay in plasma and CSF. Either method displayed sufficient precision and accuracy and may thus be implemented in daily routine.

Fluorescence Polarization Immunoassay↗