Kian, Susan Ashrafzadeh

Abstract INTRODUCTION Plasma phosphorylated tau at threonine 217 (p‐tau217) has emerged as one of the most promising blood‐based biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease (AD). While rare, heterophilic antibodies (HAb) are a persistent potential confounding factor in immunoassays. METHODS Potential HAb interference in the Lumipulse G pTau217 assay in samples exhibiting concentrations > 10 pg/mL were investigated. Samples were subjected to HAb blocking reagent (HBT), and in some cases, polyethylene glycol (PEG) precipitation and serial dilutions. RESULTS In 14 of the 15 suspected HAb cases, HBT treatment greatly reduced measured p‐tau217 concentrations. and in one of three specimens selected for further investigation, reduced Aβ42 concentrations PEG precipitation in the three selected samples also reduced p‐tau217 concentrations, while serial dilution yielded mixed effects. Control specimens were unaffected by sample treatment or dilutions. DISCUSSION HAb may result in falsely elevated p‐tau217 and p‐tau217/Aβ42 ratio. HAb interference should be considered in cases of unusually high p‐tau217 concentrations prior to clinical interpretation. Highlights Potential heterophile antibody (HAb) interference in the Lumipulse p‐tau217 immunoassay was investigated. Investigation was performed using HAb blocking reagent, and in some cases also using PEG precipitation . Patients with p‐tau217 concentrations > 10 pg/mL exhibited positive HAb interference in 14 of 15 cases. HAb interference can lead to falsely positive p‐tau217/Aβ42 ratios.

Abstract Background Interleukin 6 (IL-6) plays important roles in both innate and adaptive immunity, while dysregulated persistent production of IL-6 is involved in pathological development of various diseases associated with inflammation. Targeting the IL-6 pathway has led to many innovative treatment approaches. Siltuximab and Tocilizumab are monoclonal antibodies targeting IL-6 and IL-6 receptors respectively and have been FDA-approved for treatment of Castleman disease (Siltuximab), a rare lymphoproliferative disorder characterized by hyperproduction of IL-6 with an unknown prevalence, autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (Tocilizumab), and both shown potential as treatment for cytokine release syndrome in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. However, the presence of siltuximab can interfere with IL-6 assays, leading to the use of C-reactive protein (CRP) as a surrogate marker to monitor its efficacy. Aim To evaluate potential Siltuximab and Tocilizumab antibody interference on IL-6 measurements in three different IL-6 protein immunoassays. Method: Serum or EDTA plasma sample pools with different IL-6 concentrations ranging from low (2.3 – 11.1 pg/mL, around the reference interval cut-off for each assay) to high (18.5 – 1142 pg/mL), above reference interval cut-off for each assay) were utilized. Various concentrations of Siltuximab or Tocilizumab were spiked into the sample pools (at 10% of total volume) to achieve final concentrations up to 600 µg/mL and up to 300 µg/mL, respectively. Sample spiked with 10% saline were used as no-drug control. Three assays were used to measure IL-6 concentration: Beckman Access IL-6 assay on UniCel DxI 800 (Beckman Coulter), V-PLEX Plus human IL-6 assay on QuickPlex SQ120 (Meso Scale Diagnostics), and a Luminex cytokine panel assay developed in house (R&D systems) with upper reference interval limits of 6.4,1.8 and 5 pg/mL respectively. Results Siltuximab interfered with the measurement of IL-6 for all three assays. A significant interference (> 20% reduction) was observed at even a very low siltuximab concentrations in all three assays (0.05 µg/mL). In the presence of 5 µg/mL or greater Siltuximab, a maximum reduction of 93%, 83%, and 40% was observed for Beckman Access, R&D Luminex assay, and V-PLEX Plus Mesoscale assay, respectively. Tocilizumab did not interfere with the measurement of IL-6 in the three assays when serum was spiked with up to 300 µg/mL of the drug. Conclusion Siltuximab falsely reduce the measured IL-6 concentration on all three immunoassays tested in this study to differing degrees, whereas Tocilizumab does not. Consider the therapeutic range of Siltuximab (84 to 332 µg/mL) for treatment of Castleman disease, and a half-life of 20.6 days, measurement of IL-6 may not be useful in Siltuximab treated patients for an extended time-period.

AbstractBackgroundDecreased amyloid β1‐42 (Aβ42) and increased tau (t‐Tau and p‐Tau) concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) reflect the pathological changes of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and aid in the diagnosis of AD dementia. In the United States, the ADmark® assay has been almost exclusively used for the measurement of these biomarkers in clinical practice. Recently, our institution switched from the ADmark® assay to the Roche Elecsys assays. The goal of this study was to determine if differences exist between these methods in classification of patients as having changes indicative of AD pathology.MethodPatients undergoing ADMark® testing (n= 73) were recruited to participate in this IRB‐approved study. Two simultaneous CSF aliquots were obtained. For ADMark®, 2.0mL were collected into a 5mL polypropylene (PP) tube and shipped frozen to Athena Diagnostics per collection instructions for testing (Innotest® immunoassays for Aβ42, t‐Tau, and p‐Tau). For the Roche Elecsys assays (Aβ42, t‐Tau, and p‐Tau), 2.0mL were collected into a 2.5mL low bind PP tube, frozen, and then tested at Mayo Clinic Laboratories. Comparative analysis was performed between the two testing methodologies and to clinical findings.ResultOverall concordance between the ADMark® Aβ42/t‐Tau index (ATI) and Roche p‐Tau/Aβ42 was 89% with 8 (11%) discrepant cases. Four cases were classified as normal by the Roche p‐Tau/Aβ42 but borderline (n=3) or abnormal (n=1) by ADMark® ATI. Four cases were classified as abnormal by the Roche p‐Tau/Aβ42 and borderline by ADMark® ATI. In these cases, the normal Roche p‐Tau/Aβ42 result was most consistent with clinical diagnosis. When compared to clinical diagnosis, cases with clinical suspicion of AD dementia were abnormal in 84% and 92% of cases with the ADMark® ATI and the Roche p‐Tau/Aβ42, respectively. In cases without clinical suspicion of AD dementia, results were abnormal in 19% and 21% of cases with the ADMark® ATI and the Roche p‐Tau/Aβ42, respectively. There were 2 cases with clinical suspicion of AD dementia and 5 cases without suspicion of AD dementia that were classified as borderline by ADMark® ATI.ConclusionRoche p‐Tau/Aβ42 showed comparable performance to ADMark® ATI when correlating results to clinical diagnosis of AD dementia.