IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0201205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cross-laboratory evaluation of multiplex bead assays including independent common reference standards for immunological monitoring of observational and interventional human studies

Author

Listed:
  • Krista E van Meijgaarden
  • Bhagwati Khatri
  • Steven G Smith
  • Anne M F H Drittij
  • Roelof A de Paus
  • Jelle J Goeman
  • Mei M Ho
  • Hazel M Dockrell
  • Helen McShane
  • Simone A Joosten
  • Tom H M Ottenhoff

Abstract

Background: Multiplex assays are increasingly applied to analyze multicomponent signatures of human immune responses, including the dynamics of cytokine and chemokine production, in observational as well as interventional studies following treatment or vaccination. However, relatively limited information is available on the performance of the different available multiplex kits, and comparative evaluations addressing this important issue are lacking. Study design: To fill this knowledge gap we performed a technical comparison of multiplex bead assays from 4 manufacturers, each represented by 3 different lots, and with the assays performed by 3 different laboratories. To cross compare kits directly, spiked samples, biological samples and a newly made reference standard were included in all assays. Analyses were performed on 324 standard curves to allow for evaluation of the quality of the standard curves and the subsequent interpretation of biological specimens. Results: Manufacturer was the factor which contributed most to the observed variation whereas variation in lots, laboratory or type of detection reagent contributed minimally. Inclusion of a common reference standard allowed us to overcome observed differences in cytokine and chemokine levels between manufacturers. Conclusions: We strongly recommend using multiplex assays from the same manufacturer within a single study and across studies that are likely to compare results in a quantitative manner. Incorporation of common reference standards, and application of the same analysis method in assays can overcome many analytical biases and thus could bridge comparison of independent immune profiling (e.g. vaccine immunogenicity) studies. With these recommendations taken into account, the multiplex bead assays performed as described here are useful tools in capturing complex human immune-signatures in observational and interventional studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Krista E van Meijgaarden & Bhagwati Khatri & Steven G Smith & Anne M F H Drittij & Roelof A de Paus & Jelle J Goeman & Mei M Ho & Hazel M Dockrell & Helen McShane & Simone A Joosten & Tom H M Ottenhof, 2018. "Cross-laboratory evaluation of multiplex bead assays including independent common reference standards for immunological monitoring of observational and interventional human studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-17, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0201205
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201205
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201205
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201205&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0201205?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0201205. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.