Performance comparison of capillary and agarose gel electrophoresis for the identification and characterization of monoclonal immunoglobulins

Christopher R. McCudden, Stephanie P. Mathews, Shirley A. Hainsworth, John F. Chapman, Catherine A. Hammett-Stabler, Monte Willis, David G. Grenache

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare gel-and capillary-based serum protein electrophoresis methods to identify and characterize monoclonal immunoglobulins (M proteins). Five reviewers interpreted 149 consecutively ordered serum specimens following agarose gel electrophoresis (AGE), capillary electrophoresis (CE), immunofixation electrophoresis (IFE), and subtraction immunotyping (IT). As a screening test for detecting M proteins, AGE and CE displayed similar sensitivity (91% and 92%, respectively). CE was less specific (74%) than AGE (81%). An analysis of interinterpreter agreement revealed that interpretations were more consistent using gel-based methods than capillary-based methods, with 80% of the gel interpretations being in complete (5/5) agreement compared with 67% of the capillary interpretations. After implementing the capillary-based methods, the number of tests per reportable result increased (from 1.58 to 1.73). CE is an analytically suitable alternative to AGE, but laboratories implementing it will need to continue IFE testing to characterize all M proteins detected by CE.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)451-458
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Clinical Pathology
Volume129
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Agar Gel Electrophoresis
Capillary Electrophoresis
Immunoglobulins
Electrophoresis
Gels
Proteins
Immunoglobulin M
Blood Proteins
Serum

Keywords

  • Agarose gel electrophoresis
  • Capillary electrophoresis
  • Immunofixation electrophoresis
  • Immunosubtraction electrophoresis
  • Immunotyping electrophoresis
  • Monoclonal gammopathy
  • Multiple myeloma
  • Serum protein electrophoresis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Cite this

Performance comparison of capillary and agarose gel electrophoresis for the identification and characterization of monoclonal immunoglobulins. / McCudden, Christopher R.; Mathews, Stephanie P.; Hainsworth, Shirley A.; Chapman, John F.; Hammett-Stabler, Catherine A.; Willis, Monte; Grenache, David G.

In: American Journal of Clinical Pathology, Vol. 129, No. 3, 01.03.2008, p. 451-458.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

McCudden, Christopher R. ; Mathews, Stephanie P. ; Hainsworth, Shirley A. ; Chapman, John F. ; Hammett-Stabler, Catherine A. ; Willis, Monte ; Grenache, David G. / Performance comparison of capillary and agarose gel electrophoresis for the identification and characterization of monoclonal immunoglobulins. In: American Journal of Clinical Pathology. 2008 ; Vol. 129, No. 3. pp. 451-458.
@article{70251dd8af734b24869507b9bb0fce4a,
title = "Performance comparison of capillary and agarose gel electrophoresis for the identification and characterization of monoclonal immunoglobulins",
abstract = "The objective of this study was to compare gel-and capillary-based serum protein electrophoresis methods to identify and characterize monoclonal immunoglobulins (M proteins). Five reviewers interpreted 149 consecutively ordered serum specimens following agarose gel electrophoresis (AGE), capillary electrophoresis (CE), immunofixation electrophoresis (IFE), and subtraction immunotyping (IT). As a screening test for detecting M proteins, AGE and CE displayed similar sensitivity (91{\%} and 92{\%}, respectively). CE was less specific (74{\%}) than AGE (81{\%}). An analysis of interinterpreter agreement revealed that interpretations were more consistent using gel-based methods than capillary-based methods, with 80{\%} of the gel interpretations being in complete (5/5) agreement compared with 67{\%} of the capillary interpretations. After implementing the capillary-based methods, the number of tests per reportable result increased (from 1.58 to 1.73). CE is an analytically suitable alternative to AGE, but laboratories implementing it will need to continue IFE testing to characterize all M proteins detected by CE.",
keywords = "Agarose gel electrophoresis, Capillary electrophoresis, Immunofixation electrophoresis, Immunosubtraction electrophoresis, Immunotyping electrophoresis, Monoclonal gammopathy, Multiple myeloma, Serum protein electrophoresis",
author = "McCudden, {Christopher R.} and Mathews, {Stephanie P.} and Hainsworth, {Shirley A.} and Chapman, {John F.} and Hammett-Stabler, {Catherine A.} and Monte Willis and Grenache, {David G.}",
year = "2008",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1309/6KT8N49BRNVVVBT1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "129",
pages = "451--458",
journal = "American Journal of Clinical Pathology",
issn = "0002-9173",
publisher = "American Society of Clinical Pathologists",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Performance comparison of capillary and agarose gel electrophoresis for the identification and characterization of monoclonal immunoglobulins

AU - McCudden, Christopher R.

AU - Mathews, Stephanie P.

AU - Hainsworth, Shirley A.

AU - Chapman, John F.

AU - Hammett-Stabler, Catherine A.

AU - Willis, Monte

AU - Grenache, David G.

PY - 2008/3/1

Y1 - 2008/3/1

N2 - The objective of this study was to compare gel-and capillary-based serum protein electrophoresis methods to identify and characterize monoclonal immunoglobulins (M proteins). Five reviewers interpreted 149 consecutively ordered serum specimens following agarose gel electrophoresis (AGE), capillary electrophoresis (CE), immunofixation electrophoresis (IFE), and subtraction immunotyping (IT). As a screening test for detecting M proteins, AGE and CE displayed similar sensitivity (91% and 92%, respectively). CE was less specific (74%) than AGE (81%). An analysis of interinterpreter agreement revealed that interpretations were more consistent using gel-based methods than capillary-based methods, with 80% of the gel interpretations being in complete (5/5) agreement compared with 67% of the capillary interpretations. After implementing the capillary-based methods, the number of tests per reportable result increased (from 1.58 to 1.73). CE is an analytically suitable alternative to AGE, but laboratories implementing it will need to continue IFE testing to characterize all M proteins detected by CE.

AB - The objective of this study was to compare gel-and capillary-based serum protein electrophoresis methods to identify and characterize monoclonal immunoglobulins (M proteins). Five reviewers interpreted 149 consecutively ordered serum specimens following agarose gel electrophoresis (AGE), capillary electrophoresis (CE), immunofixation electrophoresis (IFE), and subtraction immunotyping (IT). As a screening test for detecting M proteins, AGE and CE displayed similar sensitivity (91% and 92%, respectively). CE was less specific (74%) than AGE (81%). An analysis of interinterpreter agreement revealed that interpretations were more consistent using gel-based methods than capillary-based methods, with 80% of the gel interpretations being in complete (5/5) agreement compared with 67% of the capillary interpretations. After implementing the capillary-based methods, the number of tests per reportable result increased (from 1.58 to 1.73). CE is an analytically suitable alternative to AGE, but laboratories implementing it will need to continue IFE testing to characterize all M proteins detected by CE.

KW - Agarose gel electrophoresis

KW - Capillary electrophoresis

KW - Immunofixation electrophoresis

KW - Immunosubtraction electrophoresis

KW - Immunotyping electrophoresis

KW - Monoclonal gammopathy

KW - Multiple myeloma

KW - Serum protein electrophoresis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=41649106482&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=41649106482&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1309/6KT8N49BRNVVVBT1

DO - 10.1309/6KT8N49BRNVVVBT1

M3 - Article

VL - 129

SP - 451

EP - 458

JO - American Journal of Clinical Pathology

JF - American Journal of Clinical Pathology

SN - 0002-9173

IS - 3

ER -