Cited by 408Acute Myocardial Infarction ResearchClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics

Cardiac Troponin Assays: Guide to Understanding Analytical Characteristics and Their Impact on Clinical Care

Apple, Fred S, Sandoval, Yader, Jaffe, Allan S, Ordonez-Llanos, Jordi·2017·Clinical Chemistry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cardiac troponin I (cTnI) and cardiac troponin T (cTnT) determinations are fixtures in clinical practice and research. Cardiac troponin testing has been the standard of practice for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), early rule-out, risk stratification, and outcomes assessment in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and non-ACS myocardial injury. We recognize from reading the literature over the past several years how poorly understood the analytical characteristics are for cTnI and cTnT assays by laboratorians, clinicians, and scientists who use these assays. CONTENT: The purposes of this mini-review are (a) to define limit of blank, limit of detection, limit of quantification, and imprecision, (b) overview the analytical characteristics of the existing cardiac troponin assays, (c) recommend approaches to define a healthy (normal) reference population for determining the 99th percentile and the appropriate statistic to use for this calculation, (d) clarify how an assay becomes designated as “high sensitivity,” and (e) provide guidance on determining delta (Δ) change values. SUMMARY: This review raises important educational information regarding cTnI and cTnT assays, their 99th percentile upper reference limits (URL) differentiated by sex, and specifically addresses high-sensitivity (hs)-assays used to measure low concentrations. Recommendations are made to help clarify the nomenclature and analytical and clinical characteristics to define hs-assays. The review also identifies challenges for the evolving implementation of hs-assays into clinical practice. It is hoped that with the introduction of these concepts, laboratorians, clinicians and researchers can develop a more unified view of how these assays should be used worldwide.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1373/clinchem.2016.255109

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • The NP-Pep is capable of reproducibly and effectively enriching cTnI across all tested serum samples without the use of antibody.

    “These serum cTnI enrichment results illustrate the major benefits of functionalized NPs compared to current antibody-based approaches: (1) NPs are capable of reproducibly and effectively enriching cTnI (Supplementary Fig. 23) across all tested serum samples without the use of antibody, thus overcoming the intrinsic antibody-related limitations (vide supra)14,15,51–53.”
  • The functionalized NPs possess unique advantages over antibody-based platforms: comparable size and diffusion kinetics to proteins, high surface area per volume and high number of flexible binding sites, and inexpensive, simple, fast, scalable synthesis with minimal batch-to-batch variability.

    “These results highlight the unique advantages that these functionalized NPs possess for protein enrichment over antibody-based platforms: (a) comparable size and diffusion kinetics to proteins, promoting effective capture of low-abundance proteins within complex mixtures20,47,48; (b) high surface area per volume and high number of flexible binding sites, contributing to high ligand density and”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Apple, F. S., Sandoval, Y., Jaffe, A. S., & Ordonez-Llanos, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • Abbott Northwestern Hospital (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Servei Bioquimica, IBB-Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau and Department de Bioquimica i Biologia Molecular, Universitat Autònoma, Barcelona, Spain
Corresponding author
Apple, Fred S
Venue
Clinical Chemistry
Published
2017-01-01
Volume
63
Issue
1
Pages
73-81
ISSN
  • 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8561
OpenAlex
W2530199167
Cited by
408
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 35
FWCI
7.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Roche Diagnostics and Singulex, Inc.
  • Abbott Laboratories
  • Siemens Healthcare
  • Singulex
  • Roche Diagnostics
  • Beckman Coulter
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Keywords
cardiac troponin I, cardiac troponin T, high-sensitivity troponin assays, analytical characteristics, detection limit, limit of quantification, assay imprecision, 99th percentile upper reference limit, reference population, acute myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, myocardial injury, risk stratification
MeSH terms
Humans, Myocardial Infarction, Reperfusion Injury, Troponin I, Troponin T, Acute Coronary Syndrome

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