Vito Lampasona1, David L Pittman2, Alistair J Williams3, Peter Achenbach4, Michael Schlosser5,6, Beena Akolkar7, William E Winter2. 1. San Raffaele Diabetes Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy; lampasona.vito@hsr.it. 2. Department of Pathology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. 3. Diabetes and Metabolism, Translational Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. 4. Institute of Diabetes Research, Helmholtz Center Munich, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany. 5. Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany. 6. Institute of Pathophysiology, Research Group of Predictive Diagnostics, University of Greifswald, Karlsburg, Germany. 7. Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolic, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Islet Autoantibody Standardization Program (IASP) aims to improve the performance of immunoassays measuring type 1 diabetes (T1D)-associated autoantibodies and the concordance of results among laboratories. IASP organizes international interlaboratory assay comparison studies in which blinded serum samples are distributed to participating laboratories, followed by centralized collection and analysis of results, providing participants with an unbiased comparative assessment. In this report, we describe the results of glutamic acid decarboxylase autoantibody (GADA) assays presented in the IASP 2018 workshop. METHODS: In May 2018, IASP distributed to participants uniquely coded sera from 43 new-onset T1D patients, 7 multiple autoantibody-positive nondiabetic individuals, and 90 blood donors. Results were analyzed for the following metrics: sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, area under the ROC curve (ROC-AUC), partial ROC-AUC at 95% specificity (pAUC95), and concordance of qualitative and quantitative results. RESULTS: Thirty-seven laboratories submitted results from a total of 48 different GADA assays adopting 9 different formats. The median ROC-AUC and pAUC95 of all assays were 0.87 [interquartile range (IQR), 0.83-0.89] and 0.036 (IQR, 0.032-0.039), respectively. Large differences in pAUC95 (range, 0.001-0.0411) were observed across assays. Of formats widely adopted, bridge ELISAs showed the best median pAUC95 (0.039; range, 0.036-0.041). CONCLUSIONS: Several novel assay formats submitted to this study showed heterogeneous performance. In 2018, the majority of the best performing GADA immunoassays consisted of novel or established nonradioactive tests that proved on a par or superior to the radiobinding assay, the previous gold standard assay format for GADA measurement.
BACKGROUND: The Islet Autoantibody Standardization Program (IASP) aims to improve the performance of immunoassays measuring type 1 diabetes (T1D)-associated autoantibodies and the concordance of results among laboratories. IASP organizes international interlaboratory assay comparison studies in which blinded serum samples are distributed to participating laboratories, followed by centralized collection and analysis of results, providing participants with an unbiased comparative assessment. In this report, we describe the results of glutamic acid decarboxylase autoantibody (GADA) assays presented in the IASP 2018 workshop. METHODS: In May 2018, IASP distributed to participants uniquely coded sera from 43 new-onset T1D patients, 7 multiple autoantibody-positive nondiabetic individuals, and 90 blood donors. Results were analyzed for the following metrics: sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, area under the ROC curve (ROC-AUC), partial ROC-AUC at 95% specificity (pAUC95), and concordance of qualitative and quantitative results. RESULTS: Thirty-seven laboratories submitted results from a total of 48 different GADA assays adopting 9 different formats. The median ROC-AUC and pAUC95 of all assays were 0.87 [interquartile range (IQR), 0.83-0.89] and 0.036 (IQR, 0.032-0.039), respectively. Large differences in pAUC95 (range, 0.001-0.0411) were observed across assays. Of formats widely adopted, bridge ELISAs showed the best median pAUC95 (0.039; range, 0.036-0.041). CONCLUSIONS: Several novel assay formats submitted to this study showed heterogeneous performance. In 2018, the majority of the best performing GADA immunoassays consisted of novel or established nonradioactive tests that proved on a par or superior to the radiobinding assay, the previous gold standard assay format for GADA measurement.
Authors: Ezio Bonifacio; Liping Yu; Alastair K Williams; George S Eisenbarth; Polly J Bingley; Santica M Marcovina; Kerstin Adler; Anette G Ziegler; Patricia W Mueller; Desmond A Schatz; Jeffrey P Krischer; Michael W Steffes; Beena Akolkar Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2010-05-05 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: J S Petersen; K R Hejnaes; A Moody; A E Karlsen; M O Marshall; M Høier-Madsen; E Boel; B K Michelsen; T Dyrberg Journal: Diabetes Date: 1994-03 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Peter D Burbelo; Sandra Groot; Marinos C Dalakas; Michael J Iadarola Journal: Biochem Biophys Res Commun Date: 2007-11-29 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: Alistair J K Williams; Vito Lampasona; Michael Schlosser; Patricia W Mueller; David L Pittman; William E Winter; Beena Akolkar; Rebecca Wyatt; Cristina Brigatti; Stephanie Krause; Peter Achenbach Journal: Diabetes Date: 2015-05-13 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Dongmei Miao; K Michelle Guyer; Fran Dong; Ling Jiang; Andrea K Steck; Marian Rewers; George S Eisenbarth; Liping Yu Journal: Diabetes Date: 2013-08-23 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Taylor M Triolo; Laura Pyle; Hali Broncucia; Taylor Armstrong; Liping Yu; Peter A Gottlieb; Andrea K Steck Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2022-03-24 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Anna Casu; Paul J Grippo; Clive Wasserfall; Zhaoli Sun; Peter S Linsley; Jessica A Hamerman; Brian T Fife; Adam Lacy-Hulbert; Frederico G S Toledo; Phil A Hart; Georgios I Papachristou; Melena D Bellin; Dhiraj Yadav; Maren R Laughlin; Mark O Goodarzi; Cate Speake Journal: Pancreas Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 3.243
Authors: Davis Kibirige; Isaac Sekitoleko; Priscilla Balungi; Jacqueline Kyosiimire-Lugemwa; William Lumu; Angus G Jones; Andrew T Hattersley; Liam Smeeth; Moffat J Nyirenda Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-05-23 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Kenney Ng; Harry Stavropoulos; Vibha Anand; Riitta Veijola; Jorma Toppari; Marlena Maziarz; Markus Lundgren; Kathy Waugh; Brigitte I Frohnert; Frank Martin; William Hagopian; Peter Achenbach Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2022-01-01 Impact factor: 17.152
Authors: Bobbie-Jo M Webb-Robertson; Ernesto S Nakayasu; Brigitte I Frohnert; Lisa M Bramer; Sarah M Akers; Jill M Norris; Kendra Vehik; Anette-G Ziegler; Thomas O Metz; Stephen S Rich; Marian J Rewers Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2022-07-14 Impact factor: 6.134
Authors: Angus G Jones; Timothy J McDonald; Beverley M Shields; William Hagopian; Andrew T Hattersley Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2021-05-20 Impact factor: 17.152
Authors: Vibha Anand; Ying Li; Bin Liu; Mohamed Ghalwash; Eileen Koski; Kenney Ng; Jessica L Dunne; Josefine Jönsson; Christiane Winkler; Mikael Knip; Jorma Toppari; Jorma Ilonen; Michael B Killian; Brigitte I Frohnert; Markus Lundgren; Anette-Gabriele Ziegler; William Hagopian; Riitta Veijola; Marian Rewers Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2021-06-23 Impact factor: 17.152