NfL measurement using the Ella microfluidic platform showed high correlation with the Lumipulse system in both CSF (r=0.976) and serum (r=0.923) in patients with cognitive disorders.
Cross-Sectional (n=30)
No
Does the Ella microfluidic platform correlate with the Lumipulse automated system for measuring NfL in patients with cognitive impairment?
The Ella and Lumipulse assays show high correlation for measuring NfL in serum and CSF, allowing for cross-platform comparisons in neurocognitive disorders.
Effect estimate: r = 0.976 (CSF), r = 0.923 (serum) (95% CI 0.950-0.989 (CSF), 0.842-0.964 (serum))
OBJECTIVE: Neurofilament light chain proteins (NfLs) are considered a promising biomarker of neuroaxonal damage in several neurological diseases. Their measurement in the serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of patients with dementia may be especially useful. Our aim was to compare the NfL measurement performance of two advanced technologies, specifically the Ella™ microfluidic platform and the Lumipulse™ fully automated system, in patients with cognitive disorders. METHODS: Thirty subjects with neurodegenerative cognitive disorders (10 with Alzheimer's Disease, 10 with Frontotemporal Dementia, and 10 with non-progressive Mild Cognitive Impairment) seen at the Cognitive Neurology Clinic of Modena University Hospital (Italy) underwent CSF and serum NfL measurement with both the Ella™ microfluidic platform (Bio-Techne, Minneapolis, MN, USA)) and the Lumipulse™ fully automated system for the CLEIA (Fujirebio Inc., Ghent, Belgium). Correlation and regression analyses were applied to assess the association between NfL concentrations obtained with the two assays in CSF and serum. The Passing-Bablok regression method was employed to evaluate the agreement between the assays. RESULTS: There were high correlations between the two assays (r = 0.976, 95% CI. 0.950-0.989 for CSF vs. r = 0.923, 95% CI 0.842-0.964 for serum). A Passing-Bablok regression model was estimated to explain the relationship between the two assays, allowing us to switch from one to the other when only one assay was available. CONCLUSIONS: We found a good degree of correlation between the two methods in patients with neurocognitive disorders. We also established a method that will allow comparisons between results obtained with either technique, allowing for meta-analyses and larger sample sizes.
Urbano et al. (Tue,) conducted a cross-sectional in Cognitive impairment (n=30). Ella™ microfluidic platform vs. Lumipulse™ fully automated system was evaluated on Correlation between NfL concentrations obtained with the two assays in CSF and serum (r = 0.976 (CSF), r = 0.923 (serum), 95% CI 0.950-0.989 (CSF), 0.842-0.964 (serum)). NfL measurement using the Ella microfluidic platform showed high correlation with the Lumipulse system in both CSF (r=0.976) and serum (r=0.923) in patients with cognitive disorders.