Intricate diagnosis due to falsely elevated testosterone levels by immunoassay
Abstract
PURPOSE: Hormone immunoassay may be subject to interferences and, although rarely reported, this can occur for testosterone too. This work is aimed to highlight the importance of considering possible analytical interferences when the biochemical data doesn't match with the clinical picture.
METHODS: We report three cases of insidious diagnosis due to laboratory interference in testosterone immunoassay, and we provide a brief literature review on this issue.
RESULTS: We found falsely high testosterone levels due to the presence of heterophilic antibodies, leading to unnecessary investigations, misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatments.
CONCLUSION: The detection of elevated testosterone levels on immunoassay not corresponding to clinical findings need to be confirmed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectroscopy, prior to escalation of complex diagnostic investigation and care.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Induced osteoblast differentiation by amide derivatives of stilbene: The possible osteogenic agents
- On model selections for repeated measurement data in clinical studies
- Regulation of GLUT transporters by flavonoids in androgen-sensitive and -insensitive prostate cancer cells
- Region-specific microRNA signatures in the human epididymis
- Synthesis, biological evaluation and molecular docking of 4-Amino-2H-benzo[h]chromen-2-one (ABO) analogs containing the piperazine moiety
- In Vitro characterization of the endocrine disrupting effects of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) on the human androgen receptor
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.