ArticleEndocrine2003
Assay interference leading to misdiagnosis of central precocious puberty.
Article in Endocrine, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use of Heterophilic Blocking Tubes in Suspected Heterophile Antibody Interference Among Pubertal Patients.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Diagnosis of diseases of steroid hormone production, metabolism and action.Journal of clinical research in pediatric endocrinology · 2009Review
- Do Basal Luteinizing Hormone and Luteinizing Hormone/Follicle- Stimulating Hormone Ratio have Significance in Prognosticating the Outcome ofJournal of human reproductive sciencesArticle
- Do Basal Luteinizing Hormone and Luteinizing Hormone/ Follicle-Stimulating Hormone Ratio have Significance in Prognosticating the Outcome ofJournal of human reproductive sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immunoassays are widely used to determine hormone levels. Antibodies directed against components of the immunoassay system can interfere with analyte concentration estimates. When unrecognized by clinicians, inappropriate clinical intervention may follow. The case of a young child with premature thelarche and elevated basal and stimulated luteinizing hormone (LH) levels is presented, in whom it is hypothesized that heterophile antibodies (HAs) caused interference in the LH immunoassay. LH concentrations were measured in two different assays: LH-microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA) and LH-immunochemiluminometric assay (ICMA). To detect HA interference, LH level was remeasured after both preincubation with mouse serum to neutralize human anti-mouse antibodies, and treatment with a heterophile-blocking tube. The mean basal LH concentration by LH-MEIA was 7.4 mIU/mL and for LH-ICMA was 0.08 mIU/mL (normal range for age: 0.02-0.3 mIU/mL). LH concentration by MEIA was 0.08 mIU/mL after preincubation with mouse serum and 2.7 mIU/mL after preincubation with a heterophile blocking tube. In conclusion, HAs were identified in the serum of a child with premature thelarche. The presence of HAs led to spuriously elevated basal and gonadotropin-releasing hormone-stimulated LH concentrations, resulting in a diagnosis of central precocious puberty and unnecessary therapy. To avoid similar cases in the future, clinicians should consider the possibility of assay interference when the clinical picture is incongruent with the laboratory data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
12721497What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.