Clinical Chemistry AACC Online Job Center
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 25: 314-318, 1979;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an electronic Letter to
the Editor about this paper
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kumar, M. S.
Right arrow Articles by Deodhar, S. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kumar, M. S.
Right arrow Articles by Deodhar, S. D.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 25, 314-318, Copyright © 1979 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Improved indirect and direct radioimmunoassay for carcinoembryonic antigen

MS Kumar, KJ Carl and SD Deodhar

Values obtained by the indirect and the direct assays for carcinoembryonic antigen by use of the "CEA Roche" method and reagents differ significantly. In 32 samples the latter method gave values almost twofold those obtained by the former. The mean ratio for direct/indirect was 1.9 +/- 0.6. Analytical recovery experiments on samples to which known amounts of the antigen had been added showed a similar disparity. A simple modification of these two procedures, involving addition of normal human plasma (containing less than 2.0 microgram of the antigen per liter) to standards, eliminated this discrepancy. In the indirect method, standards were added to normal human plasma, then extracted with perchloric acid before assay. In the direct assay normal human plasma instead of goat serum, was added to standards. With these modifications the analytical recoveries of added CEA by the indirect and direct methods were 87 +/- 17% and 99.7 +/- 8%, respectively, and the mean ratio between two methods was 1.2 +/- 0.4.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1979 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.