Human epididymis protein 4 reference limits and natural variation in a Nordic reference population

The objectives of this study are to establish reference limits for human epididymis protein 4, HE4, and investigate factors influencing HE4 levels in healthy subjects. HE4 was measured in 1,591 samples from the Nordic Reference Interval Project Bio-bank and Database biobank, using the manual HE4 EIA (Fujirebio) for 802 samples and the Architect HE4 (Abbott) for 792 samples. Reference limits were calculated using the statistical software R. The influence of donor characteristics such as age, sex, body mass index, smoking habits, and creatinine on HE4 levels was investigated using a multivariate model. The study showed that age is the main determinant of HE4 in healthy subjects, corresponding to 2% higher HE4 levels at 30 years (compared to 20 years), 9% at 40 years, 20% at 50 years, 37% at 60 years, 63% at 70 years, and 101% at 80 years. HE4 levels are 29% higher in smokers than in nonsmokers. In conclusion, HE4 levels in healthy subjects are associated with age and smoking status. Age-dependent reference limits are suggested

Investigation of interference from canine anti-mouse antibodies in hormone immunoassays

BACKGROUND: Canine anti-mouse antibodies are a potential source of immunoassay interference, but erroneous immunoassay results are not always easily identifiable. Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) is a marker for the presence of gonads in dogs, but elevated AMH concentrations in neutered dogs could also be caused by antibody interference. For other assays, a discrepant result obtained after antibody precipitation might indicate antibody interference. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate if canine anti-mouse antibodies are a source of erroneous results in the AMH assay and if antibody precipitation with polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a useful tool for detecting antibody interference in a variety of immunoassays used in the veterinary clinical laboratory. METHODS: Twenty-nine positive and 25 negative samples for anti-mouse antibodies were analyzed for AMH, canine total thyroxine (TT4), canine thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) and progesterone before and after treatment with PEG. Results that differed by more than four SDs from the intra-assay coefficients of variation were considered discrepant. Elevated AMH concentrations in neutered dogs with anti-mouse antibodies and no visible gonads present were considered evidence of interference. RESULTS: Evidence of antibody interference was found in two samples analyzed for AMH. The presence of anti-mouse antibodies did not lead to a higher proportion of discrepant results after PEG treatment for any of the immunoassays. The overall incidence of discrepant results for healthy controls was very high (73%). CONCLUSIONS: Canine anti-mouse antibodies are a source of erroneous AMH results. Antibody precipitation with PEG is not a useful tool for detecting interference caused by such antibodies