ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2021
The automated processing algorithm to correct the test result of serum neuron-specific enolase affected by specimen hemolysis.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2021. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hemolysis correction factor in the reporting of serum neuron-specific enolase - Clinical utility in neuroprognostication after cardiac arrest.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Exploring the impact of pre-analytical processes on the determination of neuron-specific enolase in serum samples.Practical laboratory medicine · 2025Article
- Routine data analysis for moderate hemolysis interference correction in neuron specific enolase quantification.Biochemia medica · 2025Article
- Neuron-Specific Enolase-What Are We Measuring?International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- The Application Value of Combined Detection of Serum IL-6, LDH, S100, NSE, and GFAP in the Early Diagnosis of Brain Damage Caused by Neonatal Asphyxia.Iranian journal of public health · 2023Article
- The automated processing algorithm to correct the test result of serum neuron-specific enolase affected by specimen hemolysis.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSerum neuron-specific enolase (NSE) is an important tumor marker for small cell lung cancer and neuroblastoma. However, the test of serum NSE compromised by specimen hemolysis is presented as a falsely higher result, which seriously disturbs clinical decision. This study aimed to establish a solution integrated with laboratory information system to clear the bias from hemolysis on serum NSE test.
methodsThe reference range of serum hemolysis index (HI) was first established, and specimen hemolysis rate was compared between HI test and visual observation. NSE concentration in serum pool with normal HI was spiked with serial diluted lysates from red blood cells to deduce individual corrective equation. The agreement between individual corrective equation and original NSE test was assayed by Bland and Altman plots.
resultsThe high HI existed in 32.6% of specimens from patients. The NSE median of hemolyzed specimens was significant higher than the baseline (p = 0.038), while the corrected NSE median had no difference compared with the baseline (p = 0.757). The mean difference of corrected NSE and initial NSE was 1.92%, the SD of difference was 5.23%, and furthermore, the difference was independent of tendency of HI (Spearman r = -0.069, p = 0.640). The 95% confidence interval of mean difference (from -8.33% to 12.17%) was less than the acceptable bias range (±20%).
conclusionThe agreement between individual correction equation and NSE assay was satisfied. Our automated processing algorithm for serum NSE could provide efficient management of posttest data and correct positive bias from specimen hemolysis.
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.