Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2026
Adsorption characteristics of erythropoietin in two β2-microglobulin absorption systems: a preliminary in vitro study using FILTOR® and Lixelle®.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hara Shoichiro, Hirose Masakazu, Goto Taisuke, Imamura Katsuro
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the erythropoietin adsorption characteristics of two adsorption devices, Lixelle® and FILTOR®, used for the treatment of dialysis-related amyloidosis, using bovine serum.
METHODS: Three recirculating perfusion studies were performed using bovine serum containing recombinant human erythropoietin (epoetin beta; EPO), darbepoetin alfa (DA), or epoetin beta pegol (C.E.R.A.). Because direct quantitative assays for DA and C.E.R.A. were unavailable, and it was difficult to obtain suitable measurement systems for these agents, they were evaluated using an erythropoietin immunoassay based on assay cross-reactivity.
RESULTS: In the EPO perfusion test (n = 3), the 4-h EPO removal rate was 18.7 ± 3.2% in the Lixelle® group and 53.0 ± 3.1% in the FILTOR® group (p < 0.05). In the DA perfusion test (n = 3), the 4-h removal rate based on erythropoietin immunoassay measurements was 3.3 ± 1.5% in the Lixelle® group and 31.0 ± 6.1% in the FILTOR® group (p < 0.05). In the C.E.R.A. perfusion test (n = 3), the corresponding removal rates were 0.3 ± 0.6% and 1.3 ± 2.3%, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.5351).
CONCLUSIONS: The FILTOR® adsorption device showed greater reductions in erythropoietin concentration than the Lixelle® device in experiments using EPO. A similar trend was observed for DA, whereas no apparent difference was observed for C.E.R.A. Because DA and C.E.R.A. were evaluated using assay cross-reactivity, and quantitative assessment was limited by the sampling strategy, these findings should be interpreted with caution.
METHODS: Three recirculating perfusion studies were performed using bovine serum containing recombinant human erythropoietin (epoetin beta; EPO), darbepoetin alfa (DA), or epoetin beta pegol (C.E.R.A.). Because direct quantitative assays for DA and C.E.R.A. were unavailable, and it was difficult to obtain suitable measurement systems for these agents, they were evaluated using an erythropoietin immunoassay based on assay cross-reactivity.
RESULTS: In the EPO perfusion test (n = 3), the 4-h EPO removal rate was 18.7 ± 3.2% in the Lixelle® group and 53.0 ± 3.1% in the FILTOR® group (p < 0.05). In the DA perfusion test (n = 3), the 4-h removal rate based on erythropoietin immunoassay measurements was 3.3 ± 1.5% in the Lixelle® group and 31.0 ± 6.1% in the FILTOR® group (p < 0.05). In the C.E.R.A. perfusion test (n = 3), the corresponding removal rates were 0.3 ± 0.6% and 1.3 ± 2.3%, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.5351).
CONCLUSIONS: The FILTOR® adsorption device showed greater reductions in erythropoietin concentration than the Lixelle® device in experiments using EPO. A similar trend was observed for DA, whereas no apparent difference was observed for C.E.R.A. Because DA and C.E.R.A. were evaluated using assay cross-reactivity, and quantitative assessment was limited by the sampling strategy, these findings should be interpreted with caution.