Cited by 52Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlAdvanced Biosensing Techniques and Applications

False Biomarker Discovery due to Reactivity of a Commercial ELISA for CUZD1 with Cancer Antigen CA125

Prassas, Ioannis, Brinc, Davor, Farkona, Sofia, Leung, Felix, Dimitromanolakis, Apostolos, Chrystoja, Caitlin C, Brand, Randall, Kulasingam, Vathany +2 more·2014·Clinical Chemistry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: By using proteomics and bioinformatics, we have previously identified a group of highly pancreas-specific proteins as candidate pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) biomarkers. With the use of commercially available ELISAs, the performance of some of these candidates was initially evaluated in a relatively small serum cohort (n = 100 samples). This phase revealed that CUB and zona pellucida-like domains protein 1 (CUZD1) may represent a new, promising PDAC biomarker. METHODS: We performed detailed experiments to investigate the specificity of the commercial CUZD1 ELISA assay. CUZD1 was expressed in house in both bacteria and yeast expression systems. Recombinant CUZD1 and biological samples containing CUZD1, as well as commercial CUZD1 ELISA standards, were analyzed by Western blot, size exclusion HPLC, and mass spectrometry (LC-MS Orbitrap). RESULTS: We confirmed that instead of CUZD1, the commercial assay is recognizing a nonhomologous, known cancer antigen [cancer antigen 125 (CA125)]. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that poor characterization of commercial ELISA assays is a factor that could lead to false biomarker discovery. To our knowledge, this is the first report documenting that a commercial ELISA marketed for one analyte (CUZD1) may, in fact, recognize a different, nonhomologous antigen (CA125).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1373/clinchem.2013.215236

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Prassas, I., Brinc, D., Farkona, S., Leung, F., Dimitromanolakis, A., Chrystoja, C. C., Brand, R., Kulasingam, V., Blasutig, I. M., & Diamandis, E. P.
Affiliations
  • Mount Sinai Hospital (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • University Health Network (CA)
Corresponding author
Diamandis, Eleftherios P
Venue
Clinical Chemistry
Published
2014-02-01
Volume
60
Issue
2
Pages
381-388
ISSN
  • 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8561
OpenAlex
W2100823111
Cited by
52
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1
FWCI
3.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Advanced Biosensing Techniques and Applications
Keywords
CA125, assay cross-reactivity, recombinant protein characterization
MeSH terms
Calibration, Chromatography, Gel, Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid, Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay, False Negative Reactions, Humans, Membrane Proteins, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, CA-125 Antigen, Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal, Cell Line, Tumor, Tandem Mass Spectrometry, Early Detection of Cancer

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