Detection of antinuclear antibodies by solid-phase immunoassays and immunofluorescence analysis.

BACKGROUND Antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) are associated with several inflammatory rheumatic diseases. The aim of the present work was to evaluate enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) and compare them with classic immunofluorescent analysis (IFA) for the detection of ANA. METHODS Seven enzyme immunoassays were used in this study. All assays were applied as described by the manufacturers. Three populations were included in the study: (a) a population of patients with well-established autoimmune inflammatory disease (n = 102); (b) a population in which a rheumatic disease was diagnosed up to 5 years after an IFA was performed (n = 164); and (c) a population of consecutive outpatients suspected to have a rheumatic disease (n = 101). The current clinical diagnoses of the patients served as the standard against which performance of the assays was evaluated. RESULTS In patients with well-established rheumatic disorders, the newly developed EIA in which HEp-2 extracts were included had sensitivities and specificities comparable to or in some instances better than the IFA. The assays without HEp-2 extracts included had significantly lower sensitivities and specificities. In the outpatient population, up to 51% of patients had positive ANA tests that did not correspond to classic ANA-associated disease. However, in the assays in which the HEp-2 extracts were not included, the false-positive rate was <10%. The false-negative rate judged against IFA differed from assay to assay and disease to disease and was mostly <10%. CONCLUSIONS In this study, the sensitivities of EIAs and IFA were largely comparable. However, EIAs without HEp-2 extracts included had a low sensitivity but a high specificity, particularly in nonselected populations. The choice of test is highly dependent on the clinical setting in which the ANA test is to be used and on laboratory policy.

[1]  J F Fries,et al.  The 1982 revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus. , 1982, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[2]  R Hal Scofield,et al.  Development of autoantibodies before the clinical onset of systemic lupus erythematosus. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  T. Kveder Manual of Biological Markers of Disease , 1996, Springer Netherlands.

[4]  F. Arnett Revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. , 1990, Orthopedic nursing.

[5]  D. Seligson,et al.  Clinical Chemistry , 1965, Bulletin de la Societe de chimie biologique.

[6]  B. Richardson,et al.  Drug-Induced Lupus: Etiology, Pathogenesis, and Clinical Aspects. Etiology, Pathogenesis, and Clinical Aspects. , 2012 .

[7]  O. Rekvig,et al.  Antinuclear antibody screening in this new millennium: farewell to the microscope? , 2001, Scandinavian journal of rheumatology.

[8]  J. Koziol,et al.  A critical evaluation of enzyme immunoassays for detection of antinuclear autoantibodies of defined specificities. I. Precision, sensitivity, and specificity. , 1999, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[9]  J. Koziol,et al.  Range of antinuclear antibodies in "healthy" individuals. , 1997, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[10]  F. Spertini,et al.  Multicenter evaluation study on a new HEp2 ANA screening enzyme immune assay. , 1999, Journal of autoimmunity.

[11]  James F. Fries,et al.  Preliminary criteria for the classification of systemic sclerosis (scleroderma). Subcommittee for scleroderma criteria of the American Rheumatism Association Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee. , 1980, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[12]  R. Willkens,et al.  Significance of antinuclear factors in older persons. , 1967, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[13]  R. Jonsson,et al.  Classification criteria for Sjögren's syndrome: a revised version of the European criteria proposed by the American-European Consensus Group , 2002, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[14]  C. Pearson,et al.  A COMPUTER‐ASSISTED ANALYSIS OF 153 PATIENTS WITH POLYMYOSITIS AND DERMATOMYOSITIS , 1977, Medicine.

[15]  M. Liang,et al.  The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. , 1988, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[16]  N. Bizzaro,et al.  Variability between methods to determine ANA, anti-dsDNA and anti-ENA autoantibodies: a collaborative study with the biomedical industry. , 1998, Journal of immunological methods.

[17]  A. Wiik Appropriateness of autoantibody testing in clinical medicine. , 2003, Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry.

[18]  A. Masi Preliminary criteria for the classification of systemic sclerosis (scleroderma). , 1980, Bulletin on the rheumatic diseases.

[19]  R. Humbel,et al.  Detection of antinuclear antibodies by immunofluorescence , 1996 .

[20]  H. Holman,et al.  Mixed connective tissue disease--an apparently distinct rheumatic disease syndrome associated with a specific antibody to an extractable nuclear antigen (ENA). , 1972, The American journal of medicine.

[21]  Daniel H Solomon,et al.  Evidence-based guidelines for the use of immunologic tests: antinuclear antibody testing. , 2002, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[22]  A. Wiik,et al.  Cutting edge diagnostics in rheumatology: the role of patients, clinicians, and laboratory scientists in optimizing the use of autoimmune serology. , 2004, Arthritis and rheumatism.