Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
A known radioimmunometric prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test based on monoclonal antibodies, as well as a new PSA-ELISA utilizing 4 monoclonal antibodies directed against different epitopes of PSA were compared in a clinical evaluation. For the investigation, collectives of patient sera from patients with independently diagnosed prostatic carcinoma (PCA) as well as benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were employed. The results of the evaluation demonstrated that although the PSA immunoradiometric test and the PSA-ELISA yielded different numerical values for PSA serum concentrations, they possess comparable diagnostic sensitivities as well as specificities. The nonradioactive PSA-ELISA could therefore substitute the PSA-IRMA in a clinical routine diagnostic of PCA.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000474356 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!