Macrophage Chemokine Ligand 3 (CCL3) Competition ELISA Kit (MTS-1123-HM26)

It can help, but it's not a magic fix. Competition ELISA may behave better in some difficult matrices because the competitive binding step can be less sensitive to certain capture-related artifacts seen in sandwich formats. However, viscosity and high protein content can still slow diffusion and alter binding kinetics. We strongly recommend clarifying samples, standardizing dilution, and performing dilution linearity checks. If your calculated concentration is consistent across at least two dilutions, that indicates matrix issues are controlled. Also, maintain consistent mixing and incubation timing to keep competition conditions uniform.

The best control is a consistent internal reference. Include an internal control sample (aliquoted and stored consistently) on every plate and track its calculated concentration over time. If it drifts, you'll know the issue is procedural rather than biological. Run the full standard curve each plate and use the same curve fitting approach. Avoid variable incubation times and temperature shifts, since competition assays can be sensitive to kinetics. Finally, use duplicates/triplicates and repeat any sample that lands near the curve extremes where small absorbance changes cause large concentration swings.

Yes, but present them transparently. Do not merge raw values as if they came from the same calibration scale unless you have harmonization data showing equivalence. Instead, use each assay to support complementary claims-e.g., competition ELISA for difficult matrices and sandwich ELISA for cleaner matrices-then compare relative trends within each dataset. If you need a unified comparison, run the same sample panel on both methods and report correlation (e.g., concordance plots) rather than claiming identical absolute concentrations.