Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 2, 2026
Dried Blood Spots - Preparing and Processing for Use in Immunoassays and in Molecular Techniques
Published on: March 13, 2015
Comparison of the results for three automated immunoassay systems in determining serum HBV markers
1Department of Infectious Disease, First Hospital of Zhejiang University, Key Laboratory of Infectious Disease of Health Ministry of China, 79 Qingchun Road, Zhejiang, Hangzhou, 310003, China.
Background:
Automated immunoassay analyzers are used to identify hepatitis B virus (HBV) serum markers. In regions with high prevalence of HBV, it is imperative to compare test results from different immunoassay analyzers.
Methods:
Samples from 496 subjects were collected and HBV markers were determined (double-blind, parallel manner) using Abbott AxSYM, Roche Modular Analytics E170, and Abbott Architect i2000).
Results:
Concurrence between AxSYM and E170 was 97.78% for HBsAg, 91.13% for anti-HBs, 98.79% for anti-HBc, 98.39% for HBeAg, and 88.91% for anti-HBe. Positive rates of anti-HBs and anti-HBe from AxSYM were lower than E170 (P<0.01). Concurrence between AxSYM and Architect i2000 was 98.79% for HBsAg, 91.33% for anti-HBs, 95.97% for anti-HBc, 98.39% for HBeAg, and 95.77% for anti-HBe. Positive anti-HBs rates from AxSYM were lower than Architect i2000 (P<0.01). Concurrence between E170 and Architect i2000 was 97.38% for HBsAg, 94.15% for anti-HBs, 95.56% for anti-HBc, 99.60% for HBeAg, and 88.10% for anti-HBe. Positive anti-HBe rates using Architect i2000 were lower than E170 (P<0.01). Overall, the greatest differences were observed in samples with low-level serum HBV markers.
Conclusion:
Significant discrepancies were observed among results for the 3 automated immunoassay analyzers, especially for low-level anti-HBs and anti-HBe results.
