An ELISA avoiding interference by heterophilic antibodies in the measurement of components of the plasminogen activation system in blood

33Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Endogenous heterophilic antibodies in blood are known to interfere with two-site enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) evoking false positive signals. In the present study, we describe an assay for the assessment of components of the plasminogen activation system (uPA, tPA and PAI-1, and their complexes) in blood which is not susceptible to interference by heterophilic antibodies. In the ELISA format, two avian (duck, chicken) antibodies are employed in the pre-analyte and two mammalian (rabbit, goat) antibodies in the post-analyte stage. The assay is compared to our earlier reported ELISA for measuring uPA, tPA and PAI-1 components in tumor tissue extracts. Applying the so-called "nonsense formats", designed against non-existent components, to the NIBSC reference preparation of rheumatoid factor (RF), no response was found with the new assay, whereas a clear RF dose-dependent interfering signal was observed with the original assay designed for tumor tissue extracts. Analysis of tumor-tissue based international reference preparations (RBG EORTC 101094 and 040297), human anti-mouse antibodies (HAMA) containing sera, and sera from patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), also displayed no false positive signals. In conclusion, we have developed an ELISA that permits the determination of blood levels of components in the urokinase system, free from disturbance by endogenous heterophilic antibodies. © 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Grebenchtchikov, N., Sweep, C. G. J., Geurts-Moespot, A., Piffanelli, A., Foekens, J. A., & Benraad, T. J. (2002). An ELISA avoiding interference by heterophilic antibodies in the measurement of components of the plasminogen activation system in blood. Journal of Immunological Methods, 268(2), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1759(02)00213-2

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