Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: Formation of antibodies to infliximab (ATI) inversely correlates with functional drug levels and clinical outcome. Comparison of drug levels and anti-drug antibody monitoring is hampered by lack of standardisation. AIM: To determine the correlation between three different assays for measuring infliximab and ATI. METHODS: Serum samples and spiked controls (total 62) were evaluated in a blinded way in infliximab and ATI assays developed by Sanquin Amsterdam, Netherlands (A), Laboratory for Pharmaceutical Biology, KU Leuven, Belgium (B) and a commercially available kit from Biomedical Diagnostics (BMD), Paris, France (C) performed by the University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), Netherlands. RESULTS: All infliximab assays showed a linear quantitative correlation (Pearson r = 0.91 for A vs. B, 0.83 for A vs. C and 0.73 for B vs. C). Assay C detected infliximab in 11 samples (18%) not detected by A and B, including samples containing only ATI. All ATI assays showed a good linear correlation (Pearson r = 0.95 for A vs. B, 0.99 for A vs. C and 0.97 for B vs. C). Assay A detected ATI in five samples with low ATI that were not detected by assays B and C. Assay B did not detect ATI in three patient samples with low ATI according to assays A and C. CONCLUSIONS: There is a good correlation of infliximab and antibodies to infliximab measurements between these assays. Nevertheless, the Biomedical Diagnostics kit detected false positive infliximab levels in 18% of the samples.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Casteele et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: