ArticleJCEM case reports2023
Insulin Immunoassay Interference Due to Human Antimouse Antibodies in a Patient With Ketotic Hypoglycemia.
Article in JCEM case reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Averting Potential Misinterpretations and Diagnostic Misapplications of Misleading Laboratory Results.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Inverted insulin to C-Peptide ratios in neonatal intensive care: is there something we don't know?Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Evaluation of an Automated Fluorescence Enzyme Immunoassay for Quantification of Equine Insulin and Comparison to Five Other Immunoassays.Journal of veterinary internal medicineArticle
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
Misinterpretation of common endocrine hormonal immunoassays can distort the clinical picture and lead to unnecessary medical workups. Potential assay inference is important to recognize when the clinical presentation and laboratory evaluation are inconsistent. This is demonstrated by the case of an 18-month-old girl who initially presented with ketotic hypoglycemia and was found on diagnostic fasting evaluation to have the triad of hypoglycemia, inappropriately high insulin levels, and low C-peptide levels-point-of-care glucose 43 mg/dL (2.39 mmol/L) (confirmatory 52 mg/dL [2.89 mmol/L]), insulin 48.1 μIU/mL (334 pmol/L), and C-peptide 0.2 ng/mL (0.07 nmol/L) concerning for factitious insulin (insulin:C-peptide ratio 4.77). On repeat diagnostic fast, insulin assays measured by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry were incongruent with prior testing by immunoassay, demonstrating a falsely elevated insulin level when measured by immunoassay, likely due to human antimouse antibody interference (HAMA 181 ng/mL). This case represents a diagnostic challenge in which is it imperative to recognize possible immunoassay interference. It is critical to establish the difference between insulin assay interference and factitious insulin through use of alternative laboratory methods as misdiagnosis could lead to the serious implication of Munchausen by proxy resulting in the removal of a child from their home and potentially parents being charged with a crime.
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.