Comparison of Two Immunoassays for the Measurement of Serum HE4 for Ovarian Cancer

Chloe Barr, Garth Funston, Luke T. A. Mounce, Philip W Pemberton, Jonathan D. Howe, Emma Crosbie

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Introduction The use of Human Epididymis Protein 4 (HE4) as a biomarker for ovarian cancer is gaining traction, providing the impetus for development of a high throughput automated HE4 assay that is comparable to the conventional manual enzyme immunometric-assay (EIA). The aim of this study was to compare two immunoassay methods for the measurement of serum HE4.

Materials and Methods 1348 serum samples were analysed for serum HE4 using both the EIA and the automated chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLEIA) methods. HE4 values were compared using a Passing-Bablok regression and agreement assessed using Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). The absolute and percentage bias of the CLEIA compared to EIA was determined.

Results There was moderate agreement between the two methods (CCC 0.929, 95%CI 0.923-0.936). Passing-Bablok regression demonstrated an overestimation of the CLEIA [constant 4.44 (95%CI 2.96-5.68), slope 1.04 (95%CI 1.02-1.07)]. The CLEIA method had a mean percentage bias of 16.25% compared to the EIA method.

Conclusion The CLEIA significantly overestimated serum HE4 values compared to the EIA, which could impact clinical interpretation and patient management. Further studies are required to develop an appropriate cut-off depending on the population being investigated and the analytic method being used.
Original languageEnglish
JournalPractical Laboratory Medicine
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 26 Apr 2021


Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of Two Immunoassays for the Measurement of Serum HE4 for Ovarian Cancer'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this