4.2 Article

Validation of a New Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay to Detect the Triggering Proteins and Peptides for Celiac Disease: Interlaboratory Study

Journal

JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL
Volume 95, Issue 1, Pages 206-215

Publisher

AOAC INT
DOI: 10.5740/jaoacint.11-042

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Celiac Disease Consortium
  2. Dutch Government [BSIK03009]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The performance of Gluten-Tee (Euro Proxima, Arnhem, The Netherlands) was tested through an interlaboratory study in accordance with AOAC guidelines. Gluten-Tec is a competitive ELISA that detects an immunostimulatory epitope of a-gliadin in dietary food for celiacs. Fifteen laboratories, representing 14 different countries, announced their interest in taking part in this study. Of the 12 laboratories that sent the results within the established timeframe, two submitted inappropriate standard curves and were excluded from the statistical analysis. Four different food matrixes (rice-based baby food, maize bread, chocolate cake mix, and beer) were selected for preparing the test samples. Two gliadin extraction procedures were used: the conventional 60% ethanol, and a new method based on the reducing reagent dithiothreitol. The 38 samples (19 blind duplicates) tested in this study were prepared by diluting the different extracts in order to cover a wide range of gliadin levels. Both sample extraction and dilution were performed by Euro Proxima; the present interlaboratory study was focused only on testing the ELISA part of the Gluten-Tec kit protocol. Repeatability values (within-laboratory variance), expressed as RSDr, ranged from 6.2 to 25.7%, while reproducibility values (interlaboratory variance), expressed as RSDR, ranged from 10.6 to 45.9%. Both statistical parameters were in the acceptable range of ELISAs under these conditions, and the method will be presented to the Codex Alimentarius as a preferred method for gluten analysis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available