
Free light chain (FLC) measurement gained a lot of interest for diagnostic workup of monoclonal gammopathy.We evaluated the performance of turbidimetric polyclonal Freelite (The Binding Site, Birmingham, UK) assays on Cobas 6000 (Roche Diagnostics, Rotkreuz, Switzerland) and nephelometric monoclonal N Latex (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Marburg, Germany) assays on BN ProSpec (Dade Behring, Deerfield, IL) vs established nephelometric Freelite assays on BN ProSpec.Analytical performance was acceptable. Method comparison (n = 118) showed significant proportional FLC differences for N Latex assays. However, good correlation and clinical concordance were shown. Recovery study in the low concentration range demonstrated consistent over- and underrecovery for Freelite reagents, hampering future research on prognostic value of suppressed noninvolved FLC. Antigen excess detection was successful for κ FLC in three-fourths of cases with Freelite reagents and in all cases with N Latex reagents. However, the latter resulted in underestimated κ FLC concentrations.FLC analysis requires continuous awareness of analytical limitations. Monitoring of disease response requires FLC analysis on the same platform using the same reagents.
free light chains, monoclonal gammopathy, Paraproteinemias, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Polyclonal, Prognosis, Sensitivity and Specificity, Immunoglobulin kappa-Chains, myeloma, Immunoglobulin lambda-Chains, Nephelometry and Turbidimetry, Monoclonal, Humans, Immunoglobulin Light Chains, Reagent Kits, Diagnostic, Nephelometry, Turbidimetry
free light chains, monoclonal gammopathy, Paraproteinemias, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Polyclonal, Prognosis, Sensitivity and Specificity, Immunoglobulin kappa-Chains, myeloma, Immunoglobulin lambda-Chains, Nephelometry and Turbidimetry, Monoclonal, Humans, Immunoglobulin Light Chains, Reagent Kits, Diagnostic, Nephelometry, Turbidimetry
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 26 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
