ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Analytical Performance of a Novel Latex Turbidimetric Immunoassay, "Nanopia TARC", for TARC/CCL17 Measurement: A Retrospective Observational Study.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Thymus- and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC, also known as CCL17) is used as a biomarker for atopic dermatitis. The methods currently used for its measurement are complex, time-consuming, and require large machinery, warranting the need for a method that is simple, has a quick turnaround time, and requires less complex machinery. We evaluated the analytical performance of a novel latex turbidimetric immunoassay method, "Nanopia TARC", on 174 residual serum samples from patients with skin or allergic diseases. This evaluation included the assessment of the limit of blank/detection/quantification (LOB/D/Q), precision, accuracy, linearity, interference, and commutability between Nanopia TARC and "HISCL TARC", based on the chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA) method. The LOB/D/Q values were 13, 57, and 141 pg/mL, respectively. The coefficient of variation of the repeatability was 0.9-3.8%, and that of the intermediate precision was 2.1-5.4%. The total error of the accuracy was 1.9-13.4%. The linearity was 141 and 19,804 pg/mL for TARC. The correlation coefficient between Nanopia TARC and HISCL TARC determined using the Passing-Bablok regression analysis was 0.999. Furthermore, the concordance of diagnostic criteria with AD was 92%. Nanopia TARC was confirmed to have the same analytical performance for TARC measurement as the existing CLEIA method.
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.