Literature DB >> 11514399

Detection of antinuclear antibodies by use of an enzyme immunoassay with nuclear HEp-2 cell extract and recombinant antigens: comparison with immunofluorescence assay in 307 patients.

N Hayashi1, T Kawamoto, M Mukai, A Morinobu, M Koshiba, S Kondo, S Maekawa, S Kumagai.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A new enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for automated detection of antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) uses a mixture of HEp-2 cell extracts and multiple recombinant nuclear antigens immobilized on beads. We compared this EIA and an immunofluorescence (IF) assay in a large group of patients and controls.
METHODS: We studied 492 healthy individuals and 307 patients with connective tissue diseases (CTDs). Sera were tested by an automated EIA (COBAS Core HEp2 ANA EIA; Roche Diagnostics) and IF. Samples were also tested for eight disease-specific antibodies, including antibodies against U1RNP, Sm, SSA/Ro, SSB/La, Scl-70, Jo-1, dsDNA, and centromere.
RESULTS: Areas under ROC curves for the EIA were greater than (P = 0.008-0.012) or numerically identical to areas for the IF method for each of six CTDs studied. ROC areas for EIA were 0.98 (95% confidence interval, 0.95-0.99), 0.99 (0.96-1.00), and 0.99 (0.98-1.00) in systemic lupus erythematosus (n = 111), systemic sclerosis (n = 39), and mixed connective tissue disease (n = 33), respectively. For all 258 CTD patients with conditions other than rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the sensitivity and specificity of the IF method at a cutoff dilution of 1:40 were 92% and 65%, respectively, vs 93% and 79% for the EIA at a cutoff of 0.6. For the IF method at a cutoff dilution of 1:160, sensitivity and specificity were 81% and 87%, respectively, vs 84% and 94%, respectively, for the EIA at a cutoff of 0.9. For 207 sera containing at least one of eight disease-specific ANAs, positivities for the EIA and the IF method were 97.1% and 97.6%, respectively, at cutoffs of 0.6 and 1:40 (P = 0.76).
CONCLUSIONS: An EIA that can be performed by a fully automated instrument distinguishes CTDs (except RA) from healthy individuals with both higher sensitivity and specificity than the IF method when the cutoff index was set at 0.9. Moreover, it can be used to exclude the presence of disease-specific ANAs by setting the cutoff index at 0.6 with almost the same efficacy as the IF method.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11514399

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem        ISSN: 0009-9147            Impact factor:   8.327


  12 in total

1.  Association between the major histocompatibility complex and clinical response to infliximab therapy in patients with Behçet uveitis.

Authors:  Kana Kuroyanagi; Tsutomu Sakai; Hideo Kohno; Kiichiro Okano; Goichi Akiyama; Ranko Aoyagi; Mayumi Inaba; Hiroshi Tsuneoka
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-08-29       Impact factor: 2.447

2.  Determination of cut-off titers and agreement between immunofluorescence and immunoblotting methods for detecting antinuclear antibodies in children.

Authors:  G Aksu; N Gulez; E Azarsiz; N Karaca; N Kutukçuler
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.352

3.  Is there a predisposition for the development of autoimmune diseases in patients with fibromyalgia? Retrospective analysis with long term follow-up.

Authors:  Ina Kötter; Daniela Neuscheler; Ilhan Günaydin; Dorothee Wernet; Reinhild Klein
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2007-07-20       Impact factor: 2.631

4.  Antinuclear antibodies measured by enzyme immunoassay in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: relation to disease activity.

Authors:  Ehud Paz; Muhammed Adawi; Idit Lavi; Yehuda Mussel; Reuven Mader
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2007-02-16       Impact factor: 2.631

5.  Automation in indirect immunofluorescence testing: a new step in the evolution of the autoimmunology laboratory.

Authors:  Renato Tozzoli; Antonio Antico; Brunetta Porcelli; Danila Bassetti
Journal:  Auto Immun Highlights       Date:  2012-07-13

Review 6.  Current concepts and future directions for the assessment of autoantibodies to cellular antigens referred to as anti-nuclear antibodies.

Authors:  Michael Mahler; Pier-Luigi Meroni; Xavier Bossuyt; Marvin J Fritzler
Journal:  J Immunol Res       Date:  2014-04-27       Impact factor: 4.818

Review 7.  Emerging technologies in autoantibody testing for rheumatic diseases.

Authors:  Nancy J Olsen; May Y Choi; Marvin J Fritzler
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2017-07-24       Impact factor: 5.156

Review 8.  Autoantibodies Associated With Connective Tissue Diseases: What Meaning for Clinicians?

Authors:  Kevin Didier; Loïs Bolko; Delphine Giusti; Segolene Toquet; Ailsa Robbins; Frank Antonicelli; Amelie Servettaz
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2018-03-26       Impact factor: 7.561

Review 9.  New platform technology for comprehensive serological diagnostics of autoimmune diseases.

Authors:  Annika Willitzki; Rico Hiemann; Vanessa Peters; Ulrich Sack; Peter Schierack; Stefan Rödiger; Ursula Anderer; Karsten Conrad; Dimitrios P Bogdanos; Dirk Reinhold; Dirk Roggenbuck
Journal:  Clin Dev Immunol       Date:  2012-12-19

10.  The Use of Poly-L-Lysine as a Capture Agent to Enhance the Detection of Antinuclear Antibodies by ELISA.

Authors:  Nancy A Stearns; Shuxia Zhou; Michelle Petri; Steven R Binder; David S Pisetsky
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-09       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.