- Research Article
1
- 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2026.107744
Multicenter comparison of LC-MS/MS, radioimmunoassay, and ELISA for assessment of salivary progesterone and estradiol.
- Apr 01, 2026
- Psychoneuroendocrinology
- Gelena Dlugash + 6 more +6
For psychoneuroendocrinology, accurate measurement of progesterone (P4) and estradiol (E2) in saliva is crucial for understanding the menstrual cycle phase and its impact on physiology and behavior. Although enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and radioimmunoassay (RIA) are the preferred methods and are more often found in research labs, liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) may provide a more valid salivary steroids assessment. In this study, we aimed to compare the performance of LC-MS/MS, ELISA, and RIA to measure salivary P4 and E2. Samples were collected from 120 participants, 81 men and 39 women, in the morning and evening. Additionally, women provided samples during the early follicular (cycle days 3-5) and luteal cycle phases (cycle days 21-23) using the forward-count method. The study considered natural hormone fluctuations (e.g., the diurnal and menstrual cycles) and quality control samples as validity criteria for method evaluation. A total of 336 samples and quality control samples were analyzed using one RIA, two ELISA, and two LC-MS/MS methods across four labs. Correlational analyses were performed to assess inter-lab x inter-method reliability, intra-lab x inter-method reliability, and inter-lab x intra-method reliability. For P4, natural hormone fluctuations in menstrual cycles were detected by all methods. However, in contrast to both LC-MS/MS methods, all immunoassays (IAs) detected an unexpected diurnal decline of P4. For E2, they were found only by LC-MS/MS and RIA. In terms of means, for P4 and E2, ELISA and RIA produced higher values compared to LC-MS/MS. For P4, the inter- and intra-method convergence was r ≥ .92. As for E2, inter-method correlations were between r = -.12 and r = .23, while the ELISA intra-method comparison showed a correlation coefficient of r = .85. Our findings suggest that while LC-MS/MS, RIA, and ELISA were capable of meeting most of the specified criteria for P4, only LC-MS/MS and RIA were able to perform similarly sufficiently at low E2 levels. LC-MS/MS provided more accurate and reliable measurements for P4 and E2, especially at low concentrations, but encountered challenges, too. Although RIA showed comparable performance to LC-MS/MS, it still suffered partly from cross-reactivity. ELISA often overestimated hormone levels and exhibited greater divergence. These differences highlight the importance of carefully selecting methods and considering their limitations in research applications.
Read more