4.1 Article Proceedings Paper

Development and analytic validation of a radioimmunoassay for the quantification of canine calprotectin in serum and feces from dogs

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF VETERINARY RESEARCH
Volume 69, Issue 7, Pages 845-853

Publisher

AMER VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.2460/ajvr.69.7.845

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective-To develop and analytically validate a radioimmunoassay (RIA) for the quantification of canine calprotectin (cCP) in serum and fecal extracts of dogs. Sample Population-Serum samples (n=50) and fecal samples (30) were obtained from healthy dogs of various breeds and ages. Procedures-A competitive, liquid-phase, double-antibody RIA was developed and analytically validated by assessing analytic sensitivity, working range, linearity, accuracy, precision, and reproducibility. Reference intervals for serum and fecal cCP concentrations were determined. Results-Sensitivity and upper limit of the working range were 29 and 12,774 4g/L for serum and 2.9 and 1,277.4 mu g/g for fecal extracts, respectively. Observed-to-expected ratios for serial dilutions of 6 serum samples and 6 fecal extracts ranged from 95.3% to 138.2% and from 80.9% to 118.1%, respectively. Observed-to-expected ratios for spiking recovery for 6 serum samples and 6 fecal extracts ranged from 84.6% to 121.5% and from 80.3% to 132.1%, respectively. Coefficients of variation for intra-assay and interassay variability were < 3.9% and < 8.7% for 6 serum samples and < 8.5% and < 12.6% for 6 fecal extracts, respectively. Reference intervals were 92 to 1,121 mu g of cCP/L for serum and < 2.9 to 137.5 mu g of cCP/g for fecal extracts. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance-The RIA described here was analytically sensitive, linear, accurate, precise, and reproducible for the quantification of cCP in serum and fecal extracts. This assay should facilitate research into the clinical use of serum and fecal cCP measurements in dogs with inflammatory bowel disease.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available