How accurate is your sclerostin measurement? Comparison between three commercially available sclerostin ELISA kits

Piec, Isabelle ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0648-1330, Washbourne, Christopher, Tang, Jonathan ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6305-6333, Fisher, Emily, Greeves, Julie, Jackson, Sarah and Fraser, William D. (2016) How accurate is your sclerostin measurement? Comparison between three commercially available sclerostin ELISA kits. Calcified Tissue International, 98 (6). pp. 546-555. ISSN 0171-967X

Preview

PDF (WDF - sclerostin measurement 15.01.2016) - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Sclerostin, bone formation antagonist is in the spotlight as a potential biomarker for diseases presenting with associated bone disorders such as chronic kidney disease (CDK-MBD). Accurate measurement of sclerostin is therefore important. Several immunoassays are available to measure sclerostin in serum and plasma. We compared the performance of three commercial ELISA kits. We measured sclerostin concentrations in serum and EDTA plasma obtained from healthy young (18-26 years) human subjects using kits from Biomedica, TECOmedical and from R&D Systems. The circulating sclerostin concentrations were systematically higher when measured with the Biomedica assay (serum: 35.5 ± 1.1 pmol/L; EDTA: 39.4 ± 2.0 pmol/L; mean ± SD) as compared with TECOmedical (serum: 21.8 ± 0.7 pmol/L; EDTA: 27.2 ± 1.3 pmol/L) and R&D Systems (serum: 7.6 ± 0.3 pmol/L; EDTA: 30.9 ± 1.5 pmol/L). We found a good correlation between the assay for EDTA plasma (r > 0.6; p < 0.001) while in serum, only measurements obtained using TECOmedical and R&D Systems assays correlated significantly (r = 0.78; p < 0.001). There was no correlation between matrices results when using the Biomedica kit (r = 0.20). The variability in values generated from Biomedica, R&D Systems and TECOmedical assays raises questions regarding the accuracy and specificity of the assays. Direct comparison of studies using different kits is not possible and great care should be given to measurement of sclerostin, with traceability of reagents. Standardization with appropriate material is required before different sclerostin assays can be introduced in clinical practice.

Item Type:	Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:	metabolic bone disease,sclerostin,elisa,clinical utility,sdg 3 - good health and well-being ,/dk/atira/pure/sustainabledevelopmentgoals/good_health_and_well_being
Faculty \ School:	Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Norwich Medical School
UEA Research Groups:	Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Groups > Musculoskeletal Medicine Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Centres > Metabolic Health
Depositing User:	Pure Connector
Date Deposited:	09 Feb 2016 11:00
Last Modified:	19 Oct 2023 01:37
URI:	https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/57007
DOI:	10.1007/s00223-015-0105-3

Downloads

Actions (login required)

View Item