Home
Home
Quick search
Order ImmunoCAP® Products Online About us Products ImmunoCAP Design Methodology Product Performance Binding Capacity Comparison RAST versus ImmunoCAP Methods of Assay Calibration Quantitation Requires Parallelism Dilution Recovery Linearity Testing Comparison Quantitation Requires Precision Correlation Coefficient Quality Assessment Performance Phadia Electronic Directions For Use Phadia Automation Phadia Software U.S. Product Catalog Material Safety Data Sheets Customer Care Phadia US Careers News Journal & Web Publications Trade shows Links Site Map
Binding Capacity Comparison

The Major Step Forward for In Vitro Allergen-specific IgE Testing


"...the most significant advance for clinical [specific IgE] assays was the development of an encapsulated hydrophilic carrier polymer to which allergen was covalently coupled. This polymer was configured into the shape of a small cup and called an [Immuno]CAP."(1)
 
Binding Capacity Comparison
 
 
Plastic tubes, plastic microtiter plates, and paper disks have relatively low binding capacities and are better suited for qualitative testing or specific investigational purposes. The saturation point of a conventional paper disc is less than 10 kU/L IgE.(2)
 
ImmunoCAP cellulose polymer binds almost 150 times more protein than a passively coated tube, well or bead, and 250-300% more protein than a paper disc (3)
 

References

1. Hamilton RG, Adkinson JR.In vitro assays for the diagnosis of IgE-mediated disorders. J Allergy Clin Immunol.
2004 Aug;114(2): 215
  

2. Dolen WK. IgE antibody in the serum - detection and diagnostic significance. Allergy 2003: 58: 718

3. Pharmacia Diagnostics AB, Axen R, Dreven H, Lober A, Yman L. International Congress of Allergology and Clinical Immunology, October 16-21, 1988, Montreux, Switzerland. Updated in 2004 by Kober A.