Background: The performances of the QMS(®) Teicoplanin immunoassay recently developed on Cobas(®) 6000/8000 systems were evaluated and compared to a fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA) [Teicoplanin Innofluor(®) Assay (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Indianapolis, IN)] on FLX analyzer (Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL)].
Methods: The validation was performed according to the Cofrac (French Accreditation Committee) document SH GTA 04. For the comparison, 48 plasma samples were analyzed by FPIA and QMS assays.
Results: The QMS assay is accurate (intra assay and inter assay inaccuracy ≤ 2.4%) and precise (intra assay and inter assay imprecision ≤ 10.2%). A linear relationship [QMS = 1.0319 × FPIA - 2.8518, r(2) = 0.9246 (P < 0.001)] between FPIA and QMS was found. In the Bland-Altman plots, no systematic bias was found even if QMS results trends to be lower (mean of the ratio QMS concentration/FPIA concentration = 0.91).
Conclusion: These results between QMS and FPIA are consistent, which indicates that QMS(®) Teicoplanin immunoassay on Cobas(®) 8000 System is an alternative to FPIA.
© 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.