The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Multiplex bead array assays: Performance evaluation and comparison of sensitivity to ELISA☆
Open accessAbstract
The measurement of soluble cytokines and other analytes in serum and plasma is becoming increasingly important in the study and management of many diseases. As a result, there is a growing demand for rapid, precise, and cost-effective measurement of such analytes in both clinical and research laboratories. Multiplex bead array assays provide quantitative measurement of large numbers of analytes using an automated 96-well plate format. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISAs) have long been the standard for quantitative analysis of cytokines and other biomarkers, but are not well suited for high throughput multiplex analyses. However, prior to replacement of ELISA assays with multiplex bead array assays, there is a need to know how comparable these two methods are for quantitative analyses. A number of published studies have compared these two methods and it is apparent that certain elements of these assays, such as the clones of monoclonal antibodies used for detection and reporting, are pivotal in obtaining similar results from both assays. By careful consideration of these variables, it should be possible to utilize multiplex bead array assays in lieu of ELISAs for studies requiring high throughput analysis of numerous analytes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
ELISA and Multiplex Technologies for Cytokine Measurement in Inflammation and Aging Research
Leng, S. X., McElhaney, J. E., Walston, J. D., Xie, D., Fedarko, N. S., & Kuchel, G. A. (2008) · The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences · doi:10.1093/gerona/63.8.879 · Cited by 516
Zhou, X., Fragala, M. S., McElhaney, J. E., & Kuchel, G. A. (2010) · Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care · doi:10.1097/mco.0b013e32833cf3bc · Cited by 327
Highly Sensitive and Multiplexed Protein Measurements
Cohen, L., & Walt, D. R. (2019) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00257 · Cited by 294
Application of short-term inhalation studies to assess the inhalation toxicity of nanomaterials
Landsiedel, R., Ma-Hock, L., Hofmann, T., Wiemann, M., Strauss, V., Treumann, S., Wohlleben, W., Gröters, S., Wiench, K., & van Ravenzwaay, B. (2014) · Particle and Fibre Toxicology · doi:10.1186/1743-8977-11-16 · Cited by 169
Byrne, M. L., O’Brien-Simpson, N. M., Reynolds, E. C., Walsh, K. A., Laughton, K., Waloszek, J. M., Woods, M. J., Trinder, J., & Allen, N. B. (2013) · Brain, Behavior, and Immunity · doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2013.08.010 · Cited by 144
Metadata
- Authors
- ELSHAL, M., & MCCOY, J.
- Venue
- Methods
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2006-04
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 317-323
- ISSN
- 1046-2023 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2001010891
- Cited by
- 568
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Multiplex bead array assays: Performance evaluation and comparison of sensitivity to ELISA☆. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ymeth.2005.11.010
- The paper
- ELSHAL, M., & MCCOY, J. (2006). Multiplex bead array assays: Performance evaluation and comparison of sensitivity to ELISA☆. Methods. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymeth.2005.11.010
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.