Quantification of Tau-A in serum after brain injury: a comparison of two analytical platforms, ELISA and electrochemiluminescence immunoassay

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Dokumenter

  • Fulltext

    Forlagets udgivne version, 1,24 MB, PDF-dokument

Background: Previous studies have indicated the utility of the ADAM10-generated fragment of tau, Tau-A, as marker of neuronal damage. However, the sensitivity of the ELISA-based system was limited. Objectives: We utilized the extensive dynamic range of electrochemiluminescence compared to colorimetric assessment to improve the sensitivity of the Tau-A assay and investigate Tau-A levels after brain injury. Methods: We converted the Tau-A competitive ELISA to a competitive electrochemiluminescence-based immunoassay, Tau-A ECLIA, and compared the methods by measuring serum samples in a TBI (n = 40) and a stroke cohort (n = 64). Results: The Tau-A ECLIA was technically robust. Only 1% of the samples was below the detection limit in the ECLIA compared to 10.6% in the ELISA . Tau-A measured in both assays could discriminate between patients with a TBI and non-trauma controls (ELISA: p = 0.0005, ECLIA: p = 0.0002). The increased dynamic range of the Tau-A ECLIA also allowed discrimination between healthy controls from patients with hemorrhagic (p = 0.0172) and severe ischemic stroke (p = 0.0118) respectively, as well as patients with mild ischemic stroke from severe (p = 0.0445). Conclusions: The Tau-A ECLIA was characterized by dynamic range compared to the ELISA, which facilitated a better separation between the patient groups. Tau-A warrants further investigation as a neuronal injury associated marker.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftBrain Injury
Vol/bind36
Udgave nummer6
Sider (fra-til)792-799
Antal sider8
ISSN0269-9052
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2022

Bibliografisk note

Funding Information:
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Innovative Training Networks-European Training Networks BBDiag project under grant No. H2020-MSCA-ITN-2016 721281. The Danish Research Foundation (“Den Danske Forskningsfond”) also supported this work. The funding parties had no role in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript. We would like to thank Inge Kolding for her technical assistance.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Nordic Bioscience A/S. Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

ID: 322877312