ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2019
Accuracy evaluation of automated electrochemiluminescence immunoassay for everolimus and sirolimus compared to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and Clinical Validation of Model-Informed Precision Dosing for Everolimus in Liver Transplant Recipients.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2025Article
- The measurement of immunosuppressive drugs bymass spectrometry and immunoassay in a SouthAfrican transplant setting.Practical laboratory medicine · 2024Article
- A persistently febrile patient post-bone marrow transplant.Journal of mass spectrometry and advances in the clinical lab · 2023Article
- Comparison of LC-MS/MS and EMIT methods for the precise determination of blood sirolimus in children with vascular anomalies.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Wide electrochemical window of screen-printed electrode for determination of rapamycin using ionic liquid/graphene composites.Mikrochimica acta · 2020Article
- Accuracy evaluation of automated electrochemiluminescence immunoassay for everolimus and sirolimus compared to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe evaluated the analytical performance of a newly developed electrochemiluminescence immunoassay for everolimus and sirolimus compared to that of liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS).
methodsAccording to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines, the analytical performance including precision, recovery, linearity, and carryover was evaluated. For correlation evaluation, the results of Elecsys
resultsThe within-run and total imprecision values were as follows: 2.3%-4.5% and 4.5%-6.4% for the everolimus assay; 3.3%-4.8% and 4.7%-8.1% for the sirolimus assay, respectively. The measured concentration was linear over the range of 0.718-27.585 ng/mL for everolimus analysis and 0.789-26.880 ng/mL for sirolimus analysis (all R
conclusionElecsys
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.