Serum effects confound the neuroleptic radioreceptor assay.
Serum effects confound the neuroleptic radioreceptor assay.
复制标题
血清效应混淆了抗精神病药物放射受体测定。
DOI：
10.1016/0024-3205(84)90019-5
复制
发表时间：
1984
期刊：
影响因子：
6.1
通讯作者：
Lewis,MH
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mailman,RB;DeHaven,DL;Halpern,EA;Lewis,MH
抗精神病药放射受体分析(NRRA)被广泛用于监测服用一种或多种抗精神病药物的患者的总的抗精神病药样活性(NLA)。Creese和Snyder的原始报告(1)指出，血清本身对结合的影响很小，与正常的日变化相比可以忽略不计。相反，在对大鼠或牛脑纹状体的研究中，我们发现来自健康、无药物志愿者的血清，当使用50μL/1毫升试剂盒时，引起明显的结合抑制。尽管任何血清样本对特定的牛或大鼠纹状体膜制剂都有可重复的抑制作用，但当比较几种纹状体膜制剂时，不同血清样本的效果可能会有显著差异。此外，在不同时间从人身上采集的样本也可能有所不同，尽管小于个体之间的差异。尽管有这种差异，在血清存在或不存在的情况下，log-logit曲线的斜率都等于1。由于单个血清与不同膜制剂相互作用的差异，简单地将对照血清包括在标准曲线中很难准确补偿这种血清效应。因此，在抗神经药的临床药理学中，NRRA作为一种定量工具的使用可能受到血清这种非特异性作用的限制，这一发现可能为NRRA与直接分析方法的比较中发现的一些不一致提供了一种解释。
The neuroleptic radioreceptor assay (NRRA) is used widely to monitor total neuroleptic-like activity (NLA) in patients taking one or more antipsychotic drugs. The original report of Creese and Snyder (1) stated that serum alone caused a small effect on binding which was negligible compared to normal daily variations in the assay. Conversely, in studies with striata from rat or cow brain, we found that sera from healthy, drug free volunteers, when used at 50 μL/ 1 mL assay volume, caused marked inhibition of binding. although any sample of serum causes reproducible inhibition with a given preparation of bovine or rat striatal membranes, the effects of various serum samples may differ markedly when several striatal membrane preparations are compared. Moreover, samples taken from people at different times may also vary, although less than the interindividual differences. Despite this variance, the slopes of log-logit plots were equal to 1 either in the presence or absence of serum. Because of the differences in the interaction of individual sera with different membrane preparations, it is difficult to compensate accurately for this serum effect by simply including control serum in the standard curve. Thus, the use of the NRRA as a quantitative tool in the clinical pharmacology of neuroleptics may be limited by this non-specific effect of serum, and this finding may offer one explanation for some of the inconsistencies found in comparing the NRRA with direct analytical methods.