Radioimmunoassay for somatomedin C: Comparison with radioreceptor assay in patients with growth-hormone disorders, hypothyroisism, and renal failure

125Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

We raised an antiserum (Tr4) in rabbits against a basic somatomedin C-like peptide preparation. Using high-immunoreactivity somatomedin C tracer, we compared the performance of radioimmunoassays in which we used the Tr4 antiserum and a well-characterized somatomedin C antiserum distributed by the National Pituitary Agency (NPA) with that of the human placental-membrane somatomedin radioreceptor assay (RRA). In their cross reactivity towards various somatomedin-like and unrelated peptides, the two radioimmunoassay methods were almost identical, although NPA antiserum, with about fourfold higher titer than Tr4 antiserum, showed a slightly greater sensitivity for most peptides tested. Radioimmunoassay of acid-ethanol-extracted plasma samples from normal persons and acromegalic, hypopituitary, hypothyroid, and renal failure patients revealed no analytical differences between the antisera (for 122 samples, r = 0.979 between methods). Somatomedin values for acromegalic and hypopituitary samples showed no overlap with normals. Values for hypothyroid and pre-dialysis renal failure samples were significantly lower than normal. By comparison, the RRA showed greater cross reactivity towards some somatomedin-like peptides and gave significantly lower values than radioimmunoassay for acromegalic and hypothyroid plasma extracts, and significantly higher values for hypopituitary and renal failure samples. We conclude that the radioimmunoassay methods clearly are of greater diagnostic value than RRA for clincal somatomedin measurement.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Baxter, R. C., Brown, S., & Turtle, J. R. (1982). Radioimmunoassay for somatomedin C: Comparison with radioreceptor assay in patients with growth-hormone disorders, hypothyroisism, and renal failure. Clinical Chemistry, 28(3), 488–495. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/28.3.488

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free