Measurement and quality control issues in multiplex protein assays: a case study

Sex and ethnic differences in 47 candidate proteomic markers of cardiovascular disease: the Mayo Clinic proteomic markers of arteriosclerosis study

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) susceptibility differs between men and women and varies with ethnicity. This variability is not entirely explained by conventional CVD risk factors. We examined differences in circulating levels of 47 novel protein markers of CVD in 2561 men and women of African-American (AA) and non-Hispanic White (NHW) ethnicity, enrolled at geographically distinct sites.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Participants (1,324 AAs, mean age 63.5 y, 71% women; 1,237 NHWs, mean age 58.9 y, 57% women) belonged to sibships ascertained on the basis of hypertension. Solid-phase immunoassays and immunoturbidometric, clot-based, chromogenic, and electrophoretic assays were used to measure the 47 protein markers in plasma or serum. Marker levels were log transformed and outliers were adjusted to within 4 SD. To identify markers independently associated with sex or ethnicity, we employed multivariable regression analyses that adjusted for conventional risk factors, prior history of CVD, medication use and lifestyle factors (physical activity, alcohol consumption and education). Generalized estimating equations were used to correct for intrafamilial correlations. After adjustment for the above covariates, female sex was associated with higher levels of 29 markers and lower levels of 6 markers. Female sex was independently associated with higher levels of several inflammatory markers as well as lipoproteins, adipokines, natriuretic peptides, vasoconstrictor peptides and markers of calcification and thrombosis. AA ethnicity was associated with higher levels of 19 markers and lower levels of 6 markers, including higher levels of several inflammatory makers, higher leptin and lower adiponectin levels, lower levels of vasodilator-natriuretic peptides, higher levels of vasoconstrictor-antidiuretic peptides and markers of calcification and thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

Plasma levels of several novel protein markers of CVD differ significantly in the context of sex and ethnicity. These results have implications for individualized CVD risk assessment.

Multiplex assays for biomarker research and clinical application: translational science coming of age

Over the last decade, translational science has come into the focus of academic medicine, and significant intellectual and financial efforts have been made to initiate a multitude of bench-to-bedside projects. The quest for suitable biomarkers that will significantly change clinical practice has become one of the biggest challenges in translational medicine. Quantitative measurement of proteins is a critical step in biomarker discovery. Assessing a large number of potential protein biomarkers in a statistically significant number of samples and controls still constitutes a major technical hurdle. Multiplexed analysis offers significant advantages regarding time, reagent cost, sample requirements and the amount of data that can be generated. The two contemporary approaches in multiplexed and quantitative biomarker validation, antibody-based immunoassays and MS-based multiple (or selected) reaction monitoring, are based on different assay principles and instrument requirements. Both approaches have their own advantages and disadvantages and therefore have complementary roles in the multi-staged biomarker verification and validation process. In this review, we discuss quantitative immunoassay and multiple reaction monitoring/selected reaction monitoring assay principles and development. We also discuss choosing an appropriate platform, judging the performance of assays, obtaining reliable, quantitative results for translational research and clinical applications in the biomarker field.

Antibody-based protein multiplex platforms: technical and operational challenges

BACKGROUND

The measurement of multiple protein biomarkers may refine risk stratification in clinical settings. This concept has stimulated development of multiplexed immunoassay platforms that provide multiple, parallel protein measurements on the same specimen.

CONTENT

We provide an overview of antibody-based multiplexed immunoassay platforms and discuss technical and operational challenges. Multiplexed immunoassays use traditional immunoassay principles in which high-affinity capture ligands are immobilized in parallel arrays in either planar format or on microspheres in suspension. Development of multiplexed immunoassays requires rigorous validation of assay configuration and analytical performance to minimize assay imprecision and inaccuracy. Challenges associated with multiplex configuration include selection and immobilization of capture ligands, calibration, interference between antibodies and proteins and assay diluents, and compatibility of assay limits of quantification. We discuss potential solutions to these challenges. Criteria for assessing analytical multiplex assay performance include the range of linearity, analytical specificity, recovery, and comparison to a quality reference method. Quality control materials are not well developed for multiplexed protein immunoassays, and algorithms for interpreting multiplex quality control data are needed.

SUMMARY

Technical and operational challenges have hindered implementation of multiplexed assays in clinical settings. Formal procedures that guide multiplex assay configuration, analytical validation, and quality control are needed before broad application of multiplexed arrays can occur in the in vitro diagnostic market.