ArticlePractical laboratory medicine2021
Evaluation of a new automated immunoassay for the quantification of anti-Müllerian hormone.
Article in Practical laboratory medicine, 2021. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical validation of new alzheimer disease diagnosis tools based on plasma p-Tau217.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Emerging biomarkers for improving pregnancy planning in multiple sclerosis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Functional analysis of rare anti-Müllerian hormone protein-altering variants identified in women with PCOS.Molecular human reproduction · 2023Article
- Measurement of Anti-Mullerian Hormone: Preliminary Evaluation of an ABEI-Based Fully Automated Immunoassay.EJIFCC · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesA newly developed fully automated Lumipulse G AMH method (Fujirebio Diagnostics) was recently introduced in clinical laboratories for quantitative determination of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level in human serum or plasma. AMH has emerged as value-added biomarker in the assessment of ovarian reserve, in diagnosis of granulosa cells cancer and in the investigation of gonadal disorders. We compared Lumipulse G AMH assay performances with other methods largely applied for AMH measurements. DESIGN AND
methodsThe Lumipulse G AMH method based on two-step sandwich chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay was assessed on Lumipulse G600II analyzer. The evaluation study included imprecisions, sensitivity and linearity whereas a comparison study was performed on a heterogeneous population of 114 patients by using the Elecsys AMH Plus assay on COBAS 8000 e602 module (Roche Diagnostics).
resultsLumipulse G AMH system showed good repeatability (within-run imprecision) with CV values below 1% (0.5% and 0.9% for high and low serum pools). Similarly within-laboratory imprecision was assessed with CV values of 2.5% and 1.6% for high and low level controls respectively. A linearity regression formula of 1.0119x-0.067 with a coefficient of determination (r
conclusionsThe performance of Lumipulse G AMH system was highly comparable with that of Roche Elecsys AMH Plus assay although approximately 10% higher values of AMH levels were observed for Lumipulse AMH system at all range of concentrations. Nevertheless the Lumipulse G system seems to be largely suitable for quantitative determination of AMH level in small-scale laboratory because of the reduced size and the use of single cartridge per test assuring flexibility and easy handling.
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.