Evaluation of Mycotoxin Screening Tests in a Verification Study Involving First Time Users

Abstract

(AFB1) in maize and wheat using LFD and LC-HRMS, respectively. The results of analyses were used to calculate intermediate precision (RSDip, covering the inter-analyst variability in preparing the analytical samples and the precision under repeatability conditions) cut-off values and false suspect rates. RSDip ranged from 6.5% to 30% for DON, and from 16% to 33% for AFB1. The highest obtained variances were associated with the AFB1 analyses due to working with much lower mass fractions. The rate of false suspect results were lower than 0.1% for all tested methods. All methods showed a fit-for-purpose method performance profile, which allowed a clear distinction of samples containing the analytes at the screening target concentration (STC) from negative control samples. Moreover, the first time users obtained method performances similar to those obtained for validation studies previously performed on the screening methods included in the training course.

Ten Years of Lateral Flow Immunoassay Technique Applications: Trends, Challenges and Future Perspectives

“…This aspect has been underestimated in most publications regarding the development and application of new LFIAs. While one might think that this aspect should only concern manufacturers, it is undeniable that the researchers’ community can be a fundamental and ground-breaking support to draw up or to test validation protocols as shown by the interesting and pioneering studies of Lattanzio et al [ 277 , 278 , 279 , 280 , 281 ] and by a few other researchers [ 282 , 283 ]. In this regard, very recently, Bheemavarapu et al proposed a promising tool for the quality assessment of LFIA strips batches and to assure a robust validation of the test itself through an image processing-based algorithms to evaluate sample flow abnormalities or membrane irregularities [ 284 ].…”

A Review: Sample Preparation and Chromatographic Technologies for Detection of Aflatoxins in Foods

“…Noteworthy, rapid assays (e.g., ELISA) and LC-FLD methods are expected to compete with LC-MS, as there are substantial economic interests associated with mycotoxin analysis in the industrial market [286], stymying the existing efforts to increase the use of LC-MS that has been gaining increasing popularity among mycotoxin laboratories. Several studies compared LC-MS/MS to other analytical techniques used for aflatoxin analysis, suggesting LC-MS/MS generated comparable results compared to ELISA and LC-FLD in terms of precision and accuracy [294][295][296]. The choice of a method depends on many factors, including but not limited to data quality of quantitation.…”

Immobilized Luminescent Bacteria for the Detection of Mycotoxins under Discrete and Flow-Through Conditions

“…The development of modern methods of analyzing food and animal feed for the presence of mycotoxins is currently focused on creating fast and reliable control methods that are easily adaptable for various conditions [5]. Rapid screening methods are recognized in the European Union as a strategic tool for solving problems associated with mycotoxin contamination [6].…”