Prevalence of Heterophilic Antibodies in Serum Samples from Horses in an Equine Hospital, and Elimination of Interference Using Chicken IgY

Overview

Journal Acta Vet Scand

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Veterinary Medicine

Date 2021 Mar 13

PMID 33712042

Citations 1

Authors

Bo Dong

Daniel Bergman

Bodil Strom Holst

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Heterophilic antibodies in serum and plasma can interfere with mammalian antibodies in immunoassays and result in false test results, usually false positive. Although studies screening for heterophilic antibodies as well as elimination studies have been conducted in dogs and cats, knowledge of the presence of heterophilic antibodies in other species in veterinary medicine is limited. In this study, a 2-site sandwich-type interference assay that detects anti-mouse antibodies was used to detect heterophilic antibodies in a population of horses treated in an animal hospital.

Results: A total of 194 serum samples from 127 individual horses were analyzed. There were 11/127 (8.7%) interference-positive horses, and these were analyzed in an assay exchanging the capture mouse IgG with chicken IgY. The positive samples were negative in the chicken IgY assay, indicating elimination of a possible interference, with the chicken-based assay. Four interference-positive samples were from geldings, and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) was analyzed from these samples. AMH concentrations were negative in these samples as expected in geldings, indicating that the heterophilic antibodies did not cause interference in the AMH assay.

Conclusion: The present study shows that there are heterophilic antibodies in horse serum samples like in samples from humans, dogs, and cats. The use of chicken-based reagents, such as chicken IgY, which do not cross-react with mammalian IgG, eliminates the effects of interfering antibodies in the samples. Equine heterophilic antibodies do not necessarily cause interference in commercial immunoassays.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of an Automated Fluorescence Enzyme Immunoassay for Quantification of Equine Insulin and Comparison to Five Other Immunoassays.

Nolen-Walston R, Kulp J, Stefanovski D, van Eps A J Vet Intern Med. 2025; 39(2):e70038.

PMID: 40048611 PMC: 11884604. DOI: 10.1111/jvim.70038.

Analysis of 4 cases of children with false-positive results of novel coronavirus-specific antibody.

Dai S, Li J, Li J, Li L, Shi L, Cao L BMC Pediatr. 2022; 22(1):372.

PMID: 35765042 PMC: 9237983. DOI: 10.1186/s12887-022-03425-9.

References

Borromeo V, Berrini A, Gaggioli D, Secchi C . Heterophile antibodies in horse plasma interfering in an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Vet Res Commun. 2007; 31 Suppl 1:165-8. DOI: 10.1007/s11259-007-0023-6. View

Censi S, Cavedon E, Watutantrige Fernando S, Barollo S, Bertazza L, Zambonin L . Calcitonin measurement and immunoassay interference: a case report and literature review. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2016; 54(12):1861-1870. DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2015-1161. View

Borromeo V, Berrini A, Gaggioli D, Secchi C . Heterophile antibody interference in a solid phase sandwich immunoassay for detection of equine growth hormone in plasma. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2006; 115(1-2):1-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.vetimm.2006.10.010. View

Lonnberg M, Bondesson U, Cormant F, Garcia P, Bonnaire Y, Carlsson J . Detection of recombinant human EPO administered to horses using MAIIA lateral flow isoform test. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2012; 403(6):1619-28. DOI: 10.1007/s00216-012-5972-0. View

Kroll M, Elin R . Interference with clinical laboratory analyses. Clin Chem. 1994; 40(11 Pt 1):1996-2005. View

Kazmierczak S, Catrou P, Briley K . Transient nature of interference effects from heterophile antibodies: examples of interference with cardiac marker measurements. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2000; 38(1):33-9. DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.2000.006. View

Reinsberg J . Interferences with two-site immunoassays by human anti-mouse antibodies formed by patients treated with monoclonal antibodies: comparison of different blocking reagents. Clin Chem. 1998; 44(8 Pt 1):1742-4. View

Garcia-Gonzalez E, Aramendia M, Alvarez-Ballano D, Trincado P, Rello L . Serum sample containing endogenous antibodies interfering with multiple hormone immunoassays. Laboratory strategies to detect interference. Pract Lab Med. 2017; 4:1-10. PMC: 5574524. DOI: 10.1016/j.plabm.2015.11.001. View

Larsson A, Mellstedt H . Chicken antibodies: a tool to avoid interference by human anti-mouse antibodies in ELISA after in vivo treatment with murine monoclonal antibodies. Hybridoma. 1992; 11(1):33-9. DOI: 10.1089/hyb.1992.11.33. View

10.

Rotmensch S, Cole L . False diagnosis and needless therapy of presumed malignant disease in women with false-positive human chorionic gonadotropin concentrations. Lancet. 2000; 355(9205):712-5. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)01324-6. View

11.

Paragliola R, Corsello A, Papi G, Melfa E, Urbani A, Pontecorvi A . Immunoassay Interference on Thyroid Function Tests During Treatment with Nivolumab. Thyroid. 2020; 30(7):1091-1094. DOI: 10.1089/thy.2019.0799. View

12.

Bjerner J, Nustad K, Norum L, Olsen K, Bormer O . Immunometric assay interference: incidence and prevention. Clin Chem. 2002; 48(4):613-21. View

13.

Carlander D, Larsson A . Avian antibodies can eliminate interference due to complement activation in ELISA. Ups J Med Sci. 2002; 106(3):189-95. DOI: 10.3109/2000-1967-145. View

14.

Claes A, Ball B, Almeida J, Corbin C, Conley A . Serum anti-Müllerian hormone concentrations in stallions: developmental changes, seasonal variation, and differences between intact stallions, cryptorchid stallions, and geldings. Theriogenology. 2013; 79(9):1229-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2013.03.019. View

15.

Bergman D, Larsson A, Hansson-Hamlin H, Svensson A, Holst B . Prevalence of interfering antibodies in dogs and cats evaluated using a species-independent assay. Vet Clin Pathol. 2018; 47(2):205-212. DOI: 10.1111/vcp.12612. View

16.

Rasch E, Hirsch R, Paulose-Ram R, Hochberg M . Prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis in persons 60 years of age and older in the United States: effect of different methods of case classification. Arthritis Rheum. 2003; 48(4):917-26. DOI: 10.1002/art.10897. View

17.

Bolstad N, Warren D, Bjerner J, Kravdal G, Schwettmann L, Olsen K . Heterophilic antibody interference in commercial immunoassays; a screening study using paired native and pre-blocked sera. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2011; 49(12):2001-6. DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.2011.702. View

18.

Mongolu S, Armston A, Mozley E, Nasruddin A . Heterophilic antibody interference affecting multiple hormone assays: Is it due to rheumatoid factor?. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2016; 76(3):240-2. DOI: 10.3109/00365513.2016.1143113. View

19.

Hoikhman R, Kudlackova H, Babak V, Faldyna M, Jahn P . Detection of IgM-rheumatoid factor and anti-citrullinated protein antibodies in healthy horses and their comparison. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2018; 202:141-146. DOI: 10.1016/j.vetimm.2018.07.008. View

20.

Bolstad N, Warren D, Nustad K . Heterophilic antibody interference in immunometric assays. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013; 27(5):647-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.beem.2013.05.011. View