Comparative assessment of cross-reactivity with Big-prolactin and macroprolactin in five commercial assays for prolactin

OBJECTIVES: Cross-reactivity with high molecular-weight (MW) macroprolactin in prolactin (PRL) immunoassays has been the subject of numerous studies. In contrast, little data are available regarding Big-PRL, a 50-60 kDa PRL isoform. METHODS: The immunoreactivity of Big-PRL was evaluated on five platforms (Alinity (Abbott), DxI 800 (Beckman Coulter), Liaison XL (DiaSorin), Kryptor compact plus (Thermo Scientific), and iSYS (IDS Immunodiagnostic Systems)) using 10 serum samples characterized by gel filtration chromatography (GFC) and containing between 17 and 80 % of Big-PRL. The spread of the results as a function of Big-PRL percentage was determined. Bland Altman bias between assays was calculated using a panel of GFC-characterised sera containing macroprolactin (n=46) or monomeric PRL (n=45). RESULTS: The Big-PRL samples were obtained from nonpregnant women, seven of whom had galactorrhea or oligospaniomenorrhea. All assays recognized Big-PRL in undiluted serum but to a variable extent. The spread of total PRL values correlated positively with Big-PRL percentage (r=0.954, p<0.0001). In samples containing >70 % Big-PRL, the methods ranked in the same order of recognition as that observed with macroprolactin-rich samples. Big-PRL was strongly detected by Alinity and iSYS whereas Kryptor and DxI were less sensitive to Big-PRL, as observed with macroprolactin. Consequently, the risk of false diagnosis of hyperprolactinemia tended to be lower with these two last assays. CONCLUSIONS: All five immunoassay platforms recognize the Big-PRL component in serum but to a variable extent. A high proportion of Big-PRL, combined with the use of a highly cross-reactive assay, may cause a false diagnosis of hyperprolactinemia.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
Published
2026-11-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2026-1293
Primary Topic
Growth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
article

Comparative assessment of cross-reactivity with Big-prolactin and macroprolactin in five commercial assays for prolactin

E. Merlen, Benoı̂t Soudan, Romain Vankemmel, Pascal Pigny et al.
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
Growth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors
article

Comparative assessment of cross-reactivity with Big-prolactin and macroprolactin in five commercial assays for prolactin

E. Merlen, Benoı̂t Soudan, Romain Vankemmel, Pascal Pigny, Sofiane Chaib, Marine Malléa-Hivert
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Cross-reactivity with high molecular-weight (MW) macroprolactin in prolactin (PRL) immunoassays has been the subject of numerous studies. In contrast, little data are available regarding Big-PRL, a 50-60 kDa PRL isoform. METHODS: The immunoreactivity of Big-PRL was evaluated on five platforms (Alinity (Abbott), DxI 800 (Beckman Coulter), Liaison XL (DiaSorin), Kryptor compact plus (Thermo Scientific), and iSYS (IDS Immunodiagnostic Systems)) using 10 serum samples characterized by gel filtration chromatography (GFC) and containing between 17 and 80 % of Big-PRL. The spread of the results as a function of Big-PRL percentage was determined. Bland Altman bias between assays was calculated using a panel of GFC-characterised sera containing macroprolactin (n=46) or monomeric PRL (n=45). RESULTS: The Big-PRL samples were obtained from nonpregnant women, seven of whom had galactorrhea or oligospaniomenorrhea. All assays recognized Big-PRL in undiluted serum but to a variable extent. The spread of total PRL values correlated positively with Big-PRL percentage (r=0.954, p<0.0001). In samples containing >70 % Big-PRL, the methods ranked in the same order of recognition as that observed with macroprolactin-rich samples. Big-PRL was strongly detected by Alinity and iSYS whereas Kryptor and DxI were less sensitive to Big-PRL, as observed with macroprolactin. Consequently, the risk of false diagnosis of hyperprolactinemia tended to be lower with these two last assays. CONCLUSIONS: All five immunoassay platforms recognize the Big-PRL component in serum but to a variable extent. A high proportion of Big-PRL, combined with the use of a highly cross-reactive assay, may cause a false diagnosis of hyperprolactinemia.

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
Inserm (FR), Université de Lille (FR), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille (FR), Hôpital Claude Huriez (FR), CANTHER - Hétérogénéité, Plasticité et Résistance aux Thérapies des Cancers (FR)
Growth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon