↓ Skip to main content

Effects of serum and plasma matrices on multiplex immunoassays

Overview of attention for article published in Immunologic Research, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
Title
Effects of serum and plasma matrices on multiplex immunoassays
Published in
Immunologic Research, February 2014
DOI 10.1007/s12026-014-8491-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yael Rosenberg-Hasson, Leo Hansmann, Michaela Liedtke, Iris Herschmann, Holden T. Maecker

Abstract

Multiplexed fluorescence or electrochemiluminescence immunoassays of soluble cytokines are commonly performed in the context of human serum or plasma, to look for disease biomarkers and to monitor the immune system in a simple and minimally invasive way. These assays provide challenges due to the complexities of the matrix (serum or plasma) and the presence of many cytokines near the limit of detection of the assay. Here, we compare the readout of matched serum and plasma samples, which are generally correlated. However, a subset of cytokines usually have higher levels in serum, and the non-specific background is significantly increased in serum versus plasma. Presumably as a result of this non-specific background, disease-related decreases in low-abundance cytokines can sometimes be detected in plasma but not in serum. We further show, through spike recovery experiments, that both serum and plasma inhibit the readout of many cytokines, with some variability between donors, but with serum causing greater inhibition than plasma in many cases. Standard diluents from different vendors can partially reverse this inhibition to varying degrees. Dilution of samples can also partly overcome the inhibitory effect of the matrix. We also show that dilution is nonlinear and differentially affects various cytokines. Together, these data argue that (1) plasma is a more sensitive matrix for detecting changes in certain low-abundance cytokines; (2) calculation of concentrations in serum or plasma matrices is inherently inaccurate; and (3) dilution of samples should not be assumed to be linear, i.e., all comparisons need to be made among similarly diluted samples.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Korea, Republic of 1 2%
Unknown 62 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 28%
Researcher 13 20%
Unspecified 9 14%
Student > Master 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 11 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 20%
Unspecified 13 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 9%
Other 16 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 June 2014.
All research outputs
#10,039,486
of 12,547,694 outputs
Outputs from Immunologic Research
#442
of 631 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,875
of 189,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Immunologic Research
#18
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,547,694 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 631 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 189,191 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.