Development of a Rapid Automated Fluorescent Lateral Flow Immunoassay to Detect Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HBsAg), Antibody to HBsAg, and Antibody to Hepatitis C

BACKGROUND: Accurate, rapid, and cost-effective screening tests for hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection may be useful in laboratories that cannot afford automated chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs). We evaluated the diagnostic performance of a novel rapid automated fluorescent lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA). METHODS: A fluorescent LFIA using a small bench-top fluorescence reader, Automated Fluorescent Immunoassay System (AFIAS; Boditech Med Inc., Chuncheon, Korea), was developed for qualitative detection of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), antibody to HBsAg (anti-HBs), and antibody to HCV (anti-HCV) within 20 minutes. We compared the diagnostic performance of AFIAS with that of automated CLIAs—Elecsys (Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Penzberg, Germany) and ARCHITECT (Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL, USA)—using 20 seroconversion panels and 3,500 clinical serum samples. RESULTS: Evaluation with the seroconversion panels demonstrated that AFIAS had adequate sensitivity for HBsAg and anti-HCV detection. From the clinical samples, AFIAS sensitivity and specificity were 99.8% and 99.3% for the HBsAg test, 100.0% and 100.0% for the anti-HBs test, and 98.8% and 99.1% for the anti-HCV test, respectively. Its agreement rates with the Elecsys HBsAg, anti-HBs, and anti-HCV detection assays were 99.4%, 100.0%, and 99.0%, respectively. AFIAS detected all samples with HBsAg genotypes A-F and H and anti-HCV genotypes 1, 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, 4, and 6. Cross-reactivity with other infections was not observed. CONCLUSIONS: The AFIAS HBsAg, anti-HBs, and anti-HCV tests demonstrated diagnostic performance equivalent to current automated CLIAs. AFIAS could be used for a large-scale HBV or HCV screening in low-resource laboratories or low-to middle-income areas.

Comparison of Four Automated Carcinoembryonic Antigen Immunoassays: ADVIA Centaur XP, ARCHITECT I2000sr, Elecsys E170, and Unicel Dxi800

BACKGROUND: Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is one of the tumor markers available for evaluating disease progression status after initial therapy and monitoring subsequent treatment modalities in colorectal, gastrointestinal, lung, and breast carcinoma. We evaluated the correlations and differences between widely used, automated CEA immunoassays at four different medical laboratories. METHODS: In total, 393 serum samples with CEA ranging from 3.0 to 1,000 ng/mL were analyzed on ADVIA Centaur XP (Siemens Diagnostics, Tarrytown, NY, USA), ARCHITECT i2000sr (Abbott Diagnostics, Abbott Park, IL, USA), Elecsys E170 (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN, USA), and Unicel DxI800 (Beckman Coulter, Fullerton, CA, USA), and the results were compared. Deming regression, Passing-Bablok regression, and Bland-Altman analyses were performed to evaluate the data correlation and % differences among these assays. RESULTS: Deming regression analysis of data from Elecsys E170 and UniCel DxI800 showed good correlation (y=3.1615+0.8970x). According to Bland-Altman plot, no statistically significant bias (−1.78 ng/mL [95% confidence interval: −4.02 to 0.46]) was observed between Elecsys E170 and UniCel DxI800. However, the relative differences of CEA concentrations between assays exceeded the acceptable limit of 30%. Regarding the agreement of positivity with cut-off value 5.0 ng/mL, ARCHITECT i2000sr and Elecsys E170 showed the highest agreement (95.2%), whereas ADVIA Centaur XP and ARCHITECT i2000sr showed the lowest agreement (70.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Agreements between automated CEA immunoassays are variable, and individual CEA concentrations may differ significantly between assays. Standardization of serum CEA concentrations and further harmonization are needed.