Key result
The Atellica IM, Alere, and Elecsys NT-proBNP assays showed comparable diagnostic performance for heart failure with no significant differences in area under the curve.
Why the study?
NT-proBNP is a major diagnostic biomarker for heart failure, prompting an evaluation and comparison of the analytical and clinical performance of 3 NT-proBNP immunoassays.
Do the Atellica IM and Alere NT-proBNP assays have comparable analytical and clinical performance to the Elecsys proBNP II assay for diagnosing heart failure?
Cross-Sectional (n=160)
Do the Atellica IM and Alere NT-proBNP assays have comparable analytical and clinical performance to the Elecsys proBNP II assay for diagnosing heart failure?
The Atellica IM, Alere, and Elecsys NT-proBNP assays demonstrate acceptable and comparable clinical performance for diagnosing heart failure, though the Elecsys assay may offer slightly higher specificity.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Comparable assay performance supports interchangeable HF use; leaves open whether Elecsys offers superior discrimination.
CONTEXT.—: The N-terminal prohormone of the brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is a major diagnostic biomarker for heart failure. OBJECTIVE.—: To compare the analytical and clinical performance of 3 NT-proBNP immunoassays: the Atellica IM NT-proBNP assay (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics), the Alere NT-proBNP assay (Abbott Laboratories), and the Elecsys proBNP II assay (Roche Diagnostics). DESIGN.—: For the Atellica IM NT-proBNP assay, analytical performance, including precision, linearity, and carryover, was fully evaluated. Method comparisons among the 3 assays were performed using the Passing-Bablok regression and the κ agreement test. To evaluate the clinical performance of the assays, 160 patient samples were used from patients with (n = 81) or without (n = 79) heart failure. RESULTS.—: The analytical performance of the Atellica IM NT-proBNP assay was acceptable according to the manufacturer's claims. The Atellica IM NT-proBNP assay showed a positive bias compared with the Elecsys proBNP II assay. The Cohen κ values among the 3 assays were satisfactory (>0.80) and comparable. There were no significant differences in areas under the curve. However, for the diagnosis of heart failure, the Elecsys proBNP II showed a higher specificity and positive likelihood ratio than the other assays. CONCLUSIONS.—: All 3 NT-proBNP assays showed acceptable concordance, and their clinical performance was comparable. However, the Elecsys proBNP II might be a more discriminating NT-proBNP assay to diagnose heart failure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cho et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in Heart Failure (n=160). Atellica IM NT-proBNP and Alere NT-proBNP assays vs. Elecsys proBNP II assay was evaluated on Area under the curve (AUC) for the diagnosis of heart failure (95% CI 0.85-0.96). The Atellica IM, Alere, and Elecsys NT-proBNP assays showed comparable diagnostic performance for heart failure with no significant differences in area under the curve.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: