Key result
When supplemented with 50 micrograms/ml of oleandrin, the fluorescence polarization assay falsely recorded 535.7 ng/ml of digitoxin equivalent, whereas the chemiluminescent assay recorded 10.3 ng/ml.
Why the study?
Does the chemiluminescent assay reduce oleandrin interference compared to fluorescence polarization immunoassay in measuring digitoxin?
Population
Serum specimens supplemented with oleandrin, oleandrigenin, and/or digitoxin
Comparison
Fluorescence polarization immunoassay for… vs Chemiluminescent assay for digitoxin
Design
Other
Authors
Loading...
Clinicians should favor chemiluminescent over fluorescence polarization assays for digitoxin to limit oleandrin false positives; leaves open validation in patient samples.
Does the chemiluminescent assay reduce oleandrin interference compared to fluorescence polarization immunoassay in measuring digitoxin?
Absolute Event Rate: 535.7% vs 10.3%
The chemiluminescent assay for digitoxin is significantly less susceptible to false elevations from oleandrin cross-reactivity compared to the fluorescence polarization immunoassay.
Datta et al. (1997) studied Oleander toxicity and digitoxin immunoassay interference. Fluorescence polarization immunoassay vs. Chemiluminescent assay was evaluated on Digitoxin equivalent recorded when supplemented with 50 micrograms/ml of oleandrin (ng/ml). When supplemented with 50 micrograms/ml of oleandrin, the fluorescence polarization assay falsely recorded 535.7 ng/ml of digitoxin equivalent, whereas the chemiluminescent assay recorded 10.3 ng/ml.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: