Are the results from a multiplex proteomic assay and a conventional immunoassay for NT-proBNP and GDF-15 comparable?
Clinical Proteomics, 2023
Skau E., Wagner P., Leppert J., Ärnlöv J., Hedberg P.
| Disease area | Application area | Sample type | Products |
|---|---|---|---|
CVD | Technical Evaluation | Plasma |  Olink Target 96 |
Abstract
Background
We aimed to compare absolute plasma concentrations of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15) obtained by a conventional immunoassay with the corresponding relative concentrations from a proximity extension assay (PEA) and compare the prognostic impact of the protein levels obtained from these assays.
Methods
We evaluated 437 patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and a population-based cohort of 643 individuals without PAD. Correlations were calculated using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients (rho). The discriminatory accuracy of the protein levels to predict future cardiovascular events was analyzed with Cox regression and presented as time-dependent areas under the receiver-operator-characteristic curves (tdAUCs).
Results
For NT-proBNP, the two assays correlated with rho 0.93 and 0.93 in the respective cohort. The PEA values leveled off at higher values in both cohorts. The corresponding correlations for GDF-15 were 0.91 and 0.89. At 5 years follow-up, the tdAUCs in the patient cohort were similar for NT-proBNP and GDF-15 regardless of assay used (0.65–0.66). The corresponding tdAUCs in the population-based cohort were between 0.72 and 0.77.
Conclusion
Except for the highest levels of NT-proBNP, we suggest that PEA data for NT-proBNP and GDF-15 reliably reflects absolute plasma levels and contains similar prognostic information.