ArticleThe AAPS journal2017
A Multi-site In-depth Evaluation of the Quanterix Simoa from a User's Perspective.
Article in The AAPS journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterization of a Single-Molecule Sensitive Digital Flow Cytometer for Amplification-Free Digital Assays.ACS nano · 2025Article
- Fluid-Based Protein Biomarkers in Traumatic Brain Injury: The View from the Bedside.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Association between Cerebrospinal Fluid and Serum Biomarker Levels and Diagnosis, Injury Severity, and Short-Term Outcomes in Patients with Acute Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Review
- Development and Validation of a Simoa Assay for Determination of Recombinant Batroxobin in Human Serum.Current medical science · 2021Article
- Article
- Magnetic Particles: Their Applications from Sample Preparations to Biosensing Platforms.Micromachines · 2020Review
- Plasma alpha-synuclein detected by single molecule array is increased in PD.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An in-depth evaluation of the Quanterix© Simoa™ platform was undertaken by scientists from the AAPS Emerging Technologies Focus Group to determine the overall performance of the technology as well as provide guidance to future users. In order to test the platform in a non-GLP bioanalytical setting, a cross-site evaluation of the Quanterix IL-6 biomarker kit was performed. Parameters tested during this evaluation included sensitivity, accuracy and precision, and parallelism in human serum from normal individuals. The results demonstrated improved sensitivity compared to the claimed sensitivity of other commercially available IL-6 kits and showed excellent site-to-site reproducibility. Observed issues included difficulties with system reliability and a lack of parallelism and specificity in a subset of samples. Overall, these results demonstrate that while there are challenges to the Simoa platform this technology offers automation capabilities and excellent sensitivity that enhance bioanalysis especially of low-abundance analytes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29196830What 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.