The relevance of autoantigen source and cutoff definition in antichromatin (nucleosome) antibody immunoassays

被引:15
|
作者
Villalta, D
Tozzoli, R
Bizzaro, N
Tonutti, E
Ghirardello, A
Doria, A
机构
[1] Azienda Osped S Maria Angeli, I-33170 Pordenone, Italy
[2] Osped Latisana, Lab Chim Clin & Microbiol, Latisana, Italy
[3] Osped Tolmezzo, Lab Patol Clin, Tolmezzo, Italy
[4] Univ Padua, Ist Reumatol, I-35100 Padua, Italy
关键词
antichromatin antibodies; antinucleosome antibodies; autoantigen source; cutoff; anti-native DNA antibodies; receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves; systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE);
D O I
10.1196/annals.1313.018
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
In the last few years, several reports have shown that chromatin (nucleosome) represents the main autoantigen-immunogen in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and that specific antibodies are an important marker of the disease. To verify the clinical sensitivity and specificity of antinucleosome autoantibodies (ANuAs), we evaluated three ELISA immunoassay methods using different autoantigen preparations: Quanta Lite Chromatin, Medizym Anti-nucleo, and Nucleosome IgG Elisa. We compared the results with those obtained using two ELISA assays for determining anti-native DNA (anti-nDNA) antibodies: Axis-Shield and EliA dsDNA. We tested sera from 321 patients: 101 with SLE and 220 controls-48 with infectious diseases; 73 with autoimmune rheumatic disease (20 with rheumatoid arthritis, 30 with systemic sclerosis, and 23 with primary Sjogren's syndrome), and 99 healthy subjects. Using the manufacturer-recommended cutoff, the sensitivity for the three kits was 69%, 78%, and 74%, and specificity was 100%, 94.6%, and 95.0%, respectively. Using the cutoff corresponding to 95% specificity, the sensitivity of the methods for the ANuA assay was 86%, 77%, and 74%-higher than obtained with the two ELISA methods for anti-nDNA (65% and 64%). This study demonstrates that (1) the commercial reagents employed in clinical laboratories for ANuA detection show good sensitivity and high specificity; (2) ANuAs are more sensitive than anti-nDNA antibodies for diagnosing SLE; and (3) different solid-phase antigen preparations and methods used to define cutoff levels may affect a test's clinical performance.
引用
收藏
页码:176 / 184
页数:9
相关论文
共 4 条
  • [1] ANTIBODY-RESPONSES TO BSA IN DOGS - A SOURCE OF ERROR IN DIAGNOSTIC IMMUNOASSAYS
    CARTER, SD
    BARNES, A
    MAY, C
    HALL, EJ
    BATT, RM
    VETERINARY RECORD, 1991, 129 (10) : 220 - 221
  • [2] Relevance of anti-nucleosome antibodies detected by enzyme-based immunoassays in lupus diagnosis. Comparative analysis of four commercial kits
    Lepers, S
    Hachulla, E
    Leleux, E
    Hatron, P
    Prin, L
    Dubucquoi, S
    PATHOLOGIE BIOLOGIE, 2002, 50 (10): : 584 - 590
  • [3] Relevance of anti-nucleosome antibodies detected by enzyme-linked immunoassays in lupus diagnosis. Comparative analysis of three commercial kits
    Putova, I
    Dostal, C
    Becvar, R
    ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES, 2004, 63 : 205 - 205
  • [4] Clinical relevance of innovative immunoassays for serum ustekinumab and anti-ustekinumab antibody levels in Crohn's disease
    Morita, Yasuhiro
    Imai, Takayuki
    Bamba, Shigeki
    Takahashi, Kenichiro
    Inatomi, Osamu
    Miyazaki, Takako
    Watanabe, Kenji
    Nakamura, Shiro
    Yoshida, Atsushi
    Endo, Yutaka
    Ohmiya, Naoki
    Tsujikawa, Tomoyuki
    Andoh, Akira
    JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2020, 35 (07) : 1163 - 1170