1978Clinical ChemistryRequires access

Automated measurement of serum thyroxine with the "ARIA II," as compared with competitive protein binding and radioimmunoassay.

Max G. Reese, L. R. Johnson

Open publisher page 6 citations

Abstract

Two conventional serum thyroxine assays, run in separate laboratories, one by competitive protein binding and one by radioimmunoassay, were used to evaluate the automated ARIA II (Becton Dickinson Immunodiagnostics) serum thyroxine assay. Competitive protein binding as compared to ARIA II with 111 clinical serum samples gave a slope of 1.04 and a correlation coefficient of 0.94. The radioimmunoassay comparison to ARIA II with 53 clinical serum samples gave a slope of 1.05 and a correlation coefficient of 0.92. The ARIA II inter-assay coefficient of variation for 10 replicates of low, medium, and high thyroxine serum samples was 6.2, 6.0, and 2.9%, respectively, with an inter-assay coefficient of variation among 15 different assays of 15.5, 10.1, and 7.9%. The automated ARIA II, with a 2.2-min cycle per sample, gives results that compare well with those by manual methodology.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Two conventional serum thyroxine assays, run in separate laboratories, one by competitive protein binding and one by radioimmunoassay, were used to evaluate the automated ARIA II (Becton Dickinson Immunodiagnostics) serum thyroxine assay. Competitive protein binding as compared to ARIA II with 111 clinical serum samples gave a slope of 1.04 and a correlation coefficient of 0.94. The radioimmunoassay comparison to ARIA II with 53 clinical serum samples gave a slope of 1.05 and a correlation coefficient of 0.92. The ARIA II inter-assay coefficient of variation for 10 replicates of low, medium, and high thyroxine serum samples was 6.2, 6.0, and 2.9%, respectively, with an inter-assay coefficient of variation among 15 different assays of 15.5, 10.1, and 7.9%. The automated ARIA II, with a 2.2-min cycle per sample, gives results that compare well with those by manual methodology.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Two conventional serum thyroxine assays, run in separate laboratories, one by competitive protein binding and one by radioimmunoassay, were used to evaluate the automated ARIA II (Becton Dickinson Immunodiagnostics) serum thyroxine assay. Competitive protein binding as compared to ARIA II with 111 clinical serum samples gave a slope of 1.04 and a correlation coefficient of 0.94. The radioimmunoassay comparison to ARIA II with 53 clinical serum samples gave a slope of 1.05 and a correlation coefficient of 0.92. The ARIA II inter-assay coefficient of variation for 10 replicates of low, medium, and high thyroxine serum samples was 6.2, 6.0, and 2.9%, respectively, with an inter-assay coefficient of variation among 15 different assays of 15.5, 10.1, and 7.9%. The automated ARIA II, with a 2.2-min cycle per sample, gives results that compare well with those by manual methodology.

Key concepts: Radioimmunoassay, Competitive binding, Endocrinology, Internal medicine, Chemistry, Chromatography, Medicine, Receptor

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Automated measurement of serum thyroxine with the "ARIA II," as compared with competitive protein binding and radioimmunoassay. — Research Paper | ScholarLens