ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: A newly developed fully automated Lumipulse G AMH method (Fujirebio Diagnostics) was recently introduced in clinical laboratories for quantitative determination of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level in human serum or plasma. AMH has emerged as value-added biomarker in the assessment of ovarian reserve, in diagnosis of granulosa cells cancer and in the investigation of gonadal disorders. We compared Lumipulse G AMH assay performances with other methods largely applied for AMH measurements. DESIGN AND METHODS: The Lumipulse G AMH method based on two-step sandwich chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay was assessed on Lumipulse G600II analyzer. The evaluation study included imprecisions, sensitivity and linearity whereas a comparison study was performed on a heterogeneous population of 114 patients by using the Elecsys AMH Plus assay on COBAS 8000 e602 module (Roche Diagnostics). RESULTS: Lumipulse G AMH system showed good repeatability (within-run imprecision) with CV values below 1% (0.5% and 0.9% for high and low serum pools). Similarly within-laboratory imprecision was assessed with CV values of 2.5% and 1.6% for high and low level controls respectively. A linearity regression formula of 1.0119x-0.067 with a coefficient of determination (r2) equal to 0.999 was obtained in a range from 0.044 to 22.42 âng/ml. Passing-Bablok regression analysis was performed for assay comparability of AMH measurements. Results were closely correlated (correlation coefficient â= â0.997) with a regression equation (y â= â1.230x-0.025) showing a positive slope. Also, Bland-Altman analysis confirmed a good agreement between Lumipulse G AMH and Roche Elecsys AMH Plus assays with a bias of 17.76% in a large measurement range. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of Lumipulse G AMH system was highly comparable with that of Roche Elecsys AMH Plus assay although approximately 10% higher values of AMH levels were observed for Lumipulse AMH system at all range of concentrations. Nevertheless the Lumipulse G system seems to be largely suitable for quantitative determination of AMH level in small-scale laboratory because of the reduced size and the use of single cartridge per test assuring flexibility and easy handling.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Achromobacter are emerging pathogens in cystic fibrosis patients. Mechanisms of resistance to fluoroquinolones are unknown in clinical isolates. Among non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli, fluoroquinolone resistance is mostly due to amino acid substitutions in localized regions of the targets (GyrA, GyrB, ParC and ParE) named QRDRs, but also to efflux. OBJECTIVES: To explore quinolone resistance mechanisms in Achromobacter. METHODS: The putative QRDRs of GyrA, GyrB, ParC and ParE were sequenced in 62 clinical isolates, and in vitro one-step mutants obtained after exposure to fluoroquinolones. An in vitro mutant and its parental isolate were investigated by RNASeq and WGS. RT-qPCR and gene inactivation were used to explore the role of efflux systems overexpression. RESULTS: We detected seven substitutions in QRDRs (Q83L/S84P/D87N/D87G for GyrA, Q480P for GyrB, T395A/K525Q for ParE), all in nine of the 27 clinical isolates with ciprofloxacin MIC ≥16 mg/L, whereas none among the in vitro mutants. The RND efflux system AxyEF-OprN was overproduced (about 150-fold) in the in vitro mutant NCF-39-Bl6 versus its parental strain NCF-39 (ciprofloxacin MICs 64 and 1.5 mg/L, respectively). A substitution in AxyT (putative regulator of AxyEF-OprN) was detected in NCF-39-Bl6. Ciprofloxacin MIC in NCF-39-Bl6 dropped from 64 to 1.5 mg/L following gene inactivation of either axyT or axyF. Substitutions in AxyT associated with overexpression of AxyEF-OprN were also detected in seven clinical strains with ciprofloxacin MIC ≥16 mg/L. CONCLUSIONS: Target alteration is not the primary mechanism involved in fluoroquinolone resistance in Achromobacter. The role of AxyEF-OprN overproduction was demonstrated in one in vitro mutant.
