4.7 Article

In vivo digoxin-like immunoreactivity in mice and interference of Chinese medicine Danshen in serum digoxin measurement: elimination of interference by using a chemiluminescent assay

Journal

CLINICA CHIMICA ACTA
Volume 317, Issue 1-2, Pages 231-234

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0009-8981(01)00781-1

Keywords

Danshen; digoxin; fluorescence polarization; microparticle enzyme immunoassay; chemiluminescent assay

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Danshen, a traditional Chinese medicine used in the management of cardiovascular diseases, is available without prescription in the US. Because Danshen is used to treat cardiovascular diseases, we studied the potential interference of Danshen with serum digoxin measurement using various immunoassays. Methods: Blood was collected 1 day before and then 1 and 2 h after feeding mice with Danshen. The apparent digitoxin activities were measured by the fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPLA). We also added microliter amounts of Danshen extract to digoxin pools prepared from patients receiving digoxin. The digoxin concentrations were measured using the fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA), microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA) and chemiluminescent assay (CLIA). The observed values were compared with original values. We also fed mice with Danshen. Results: We observed measurable digoxin-like immunoreactivity in sera of mice after feeding with Danshen. We also observed falsely lower digoxin concentrations (negative interference) when MEIA was used for digoxin measurement. However, serum digoxin concentrations were falsely elevated with FPIA. We observed no interference of Danshen in serum digoxin measurement using the CLIA. Conclusions: Danshen appears to contain digoxin-like immunoreactivity but does not interfere with serum digoxin measurement when CLIA was used. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available