Skip to main content

Abstract

The accurate and reliable determination of biologically active endogenous compounds in plasma, urine, and other body fluids for scientific or diagnostic purposes has been a challenge for many decades. In the past, the assessment of such compounds was difficult and tedious because specific and practical analytical tools were not available. In the early days, decisive and convincing conclusions about the significance of a biologically active molecule in disease or health could only be made after purification and isolation of the analyte and identification of its chemical structure. A definite improvement in the analysis of biologically active endogenous compounds was the introduction of bioassays using an intact animal model or in vitro tissue preparations. Although the bioassays possessed sufficient SENSITIVITY, there were problems with their lack of SPECIFICITY. Other analytical procedures such as liquid chromatography, electrophoresis, or photometric procedures have also been developed for in vitro diagnosis. However, these approaches are either tedious or time-consuming and require expensive equipment and specially trained personal. A landmark in diagnostics was the introduction of immunoassays, which are inexpensive and easy to perform with high reproducibility, SENSITIVITY, and SPECIFICITY.

Final manuscript submitted on July 24, 2017.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Selected Readings

  • Abbas AK, Lichtman AH, Pillai S, editors. Cellular and molecular immunology. St. Louis, MO: Saunders/Elsevier; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burtis C, Ashwood E, Bruns D, editors. Tietz textbook of clinical chemistry and molecular diagnostics. St. Louis, MO: Saunders/Elsevier; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy K, Weaver C, editors. Janeway’s immunobiology. New York, NY: Garland Science; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uttamchandani M, Yao SQ, editors. Small molecule microarrays. New York, NY: Humana Press, Springer Nature; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

References

  1. Köhler G, Milstein C. Continuous cultures of cells fused secreting antibody of predefined specificity. Nature. 1975;256:495–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ring J. Diagnostic methods in allergy. Behring Inst Mitt. 1981;68:141–52.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ring J, editor. Angewandte allergologie. München: MMV Medizin Verlag; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Wide L, Bennich H, Johansson SGO. Diagnosis of allergy by an in vitro test for allergen antibodies. Lancet. 1967;2:1105.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gleich GJ, Yunginger JW. Variations of the radioallergosorbent test for measurement of IgE antibody levels, allergens and blocking antibody activity. In: Ring J, Burg G, editors. New trends in allergy. Heidelberg: Springer; 1981. p. 98–107.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Hamilton RG. Clinical laboratory assessment of immediate-type hypersensitivity. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010;125:S284–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hamilton RG. Proficiency survey-based evaluation of clinical total and allergen-specific IgE assay performance. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134:975–82.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Somers K, Govarts C, Stinissen P, Somers V. Multiplexing approaches for antibody profiling in multiple sclerosis. Autoimmun Rev. 2009;8:573–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Burbelo PD, O’Hanlon TP. New autoantibody detection technologies yield novel insights into autoimmune disease. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2014;26:717–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hsu H-Y, Joos TO, Koga H. Multiplex microsphere-based flow cytometric platforms for protein analysis and their application in clinical proteomics-from assays to results. Electrophoresis. 2009;30:4008–19.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Spengler M, Adler M, Niemeyer CM. Highly sensitive ligand-binding assays in pre-clinical and clinical applications: immuno-PCR and other emerging techniques. Analyst. 2015;140:6175–94.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mahler M, Bentow C, Serra J, Fritzler MJ. Detection of autoantibodies using chemiluminescence technologies. Immunopharmacol Immunotoxicol. 2015;38:14–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Moore CD, Ajala OZ, Zhu H. Applications in high-content functional protein microarrays. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2016;30:21–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Sun Y-S. Use of microarrays as a high-throughput platform for label-free biosensing. J Lab Autom. 2015;20:334–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Markus Ollert .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Redegeld, F., Hermann, K., Ollert, M., Ring, J. (2019). Antibody Detection. In: Parnham, M., Nijkamp, F., Rossi, A. (eds) Nijkamp and Parnham's Principles of Immunopharmacology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10811-3_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics