Evidence-based guidelines for the use of immunologic tests: antinuclear antibody testing

Accuracy of anti–ribosomal P protein antibody testing for the diagnosis of neuropsychiatric systemic lupus erythematosus: An international meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To quantitatively evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of antibodies to ribosomal P proteins (anti-P) for neuropsychiatric systemic lupus erythematosus (NPSLE) in general, for psychosis, mood disorder, or both, and for other diffuse manifestations.

METHODS

This international meta-analysis combined standardized data from 1,537 lupus patients contributed by 14 research teams. Weighted estimation of sensitivity and specificity with fixed-effects and random-effects models, as well as summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve analysis, was used to summarize test performance. The robustness of the overall estimates was examined in sensitivity analyses that included additional studies published up to November 1, 2004 in the Medline, EMBase, and Cochrane databases.

RESULTS

Combining the data from the 14 teams, the weighted sensitivity and specificity estimates for the diagnosis of NPSLE were 26% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 15-42%) and 80% (95% CI 74-85%), respectively. For psychosis, mood disorder, or both, the sensitivity and specificity were 27% (95% CI 14-47%) and 80% (95% CI 74-85%), respectively. For other diffuse manifestations, the sensitivity was 24% (95% CI 12-42%), and the specificity was 80% (95% CI 73-85%). The proportion of patients with anti-P antibodies did not vary markedly across different presentations of NPSLE. Between-study heterogeneity was substantial, but the SROC curves were consistent with the weighted estimates. In further analyses that included another 24 published studies, only the sensitivity for psychosis and/or mood disorder was slightly improved, but it was still suboptimal (42% [95% CI 30-53%]); the specificity remained essentially the same (81% [95% CI 76-85%]).

CONCLUSION

Anti-P antibody testing has limited diagnostic value for NPSLE, and it is not helpful in differentiating among various disease phenotypes.

Measurement of erythrocyte C4d and complement receptor 1 in systemic lupus erythematosus

OBJECTIVE

C4-derived activation fragments are the only complement ligands present on the surfaces of normal erythrocytes. The significance of this observation is unknown, and the role of erythrocyte-bound C4 (E-C4) in human disease has not been explored. More than any other human disease, the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) has been characterized by defects in clearance of complement-bearing immune complexes via erythrocytes expressing complement receptor 1 (CR1). This study was undertaken to determine whether these functional defects might be reflected by abnormal patterns of E-C4 and E-CR1 expression on erythrocytes of patients with SLE.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of 100 patients with SLE, 133 patients with other diseases, and 84 healthy controls. Erythrocytes were characterized by indirect immunofluorescence and by flow cytometry for determination of levels of C4d and CR1.

RESULTS

Patients with SLE had higher levels of E-C4d and lower levels of E-CR1 than did patients with other diseases (P < or = 0.001) or healthy controls (P < or = 0.001). The test was 81% sensitive and 91% specific for SLE versus healthy controls and 72% sensitive and 79% specific for SLE versus other diseases, and it had an overall negative predictive value of 92%.

CONCLUSION

This is the first report of abnormal levels of E-C4d in human disease. We found that abnormally high levels of E-C4d and low levels of E-CR1 are characteristic of SLE, and combined measurement of the 2 molecules has high diagnostic sensitivity and specificity for lupus. Determination of E-C4d/E-CR1 levels may be a useful addition to current tests and criteria for SLE diagnosis.

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 &lt;10%. The false-negative rate judged against IFA differed from assay to assay and disease to disease and was mostly &lt;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.

Evaluating inflammatory joint disease: how and when can autoantibodies help?

The diagnosis of inflammatory joint disease rests on a constellation of symptoms, signs, laboratory test results and, occasionally, histological findings. Classification criteria have been developed by national learned societies, international panels of experts or, more rarely, an expert working alone. These criteria are intended to provide a common language for therapeutic trials and international publications. Yet, they are often inappropriately used as diagnostic tools for the individual patient. Identification of an early seroimmunologic marker with high sensitivity and specificity for classifying patients with recent-onset joint disease is a daunting challenge. Test performance characteristics such as sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and the positive or negative likelihood ratio help to assess the diagnostic usefulness of a laboratory test in a specific situation. The difference between the pretest and posttest likelihoods of obtaining a positive or negative result measures the usefulness, or performance, of a laboratory test in a specific situation according to the prevalence of the disease. A higher positive likelihood ratio indicates a more useful test. In a patient with inflammatory joint disease, the diagnosis can be sought by assaying a limited number of autoantibodies according to a decision tree. Thus, IgM rheumatoid factors (latex test or ELISA) and antibodies to filaggrin or other citrullinated proteins (antikeratin antibodies by indirect immunofluorescent assay or anticyclic citrullinated peptides by ELISA) identify more than 70% of cases of early rheumatoid arthritis with greater than 98% specificity. If these markers are negative, testing for antinuclear antibodies by indirect immunofluorescent assay on HEp-2 cells identifies 99% of cases of lupus and progressive systemic sclerosis. Confirmation of the diagnosis can be obtained by characterizing the autoantibodies: thus, presence of antidouble-stranded DNA (dsDNA, by the Farr radioimmunoassay, indirect immunofluorescent assay on Crithidia luciliae, or ELISA (IgG)) or of antinucleosome antibodies (ELISA) indicates lupus, whereas anticentromere, antitopoisomerase I (Scl 70), and antinucleolar antibodies point to progressive systemic sclerosis. A positive test for antibodies to soluble nuclear antigens of the U1 RNP type suggests mixed connective tissue disease or lupus but may indicate scleroderma. Anti-Sm antibodies are found in fewer than 10% of lupus patients but are highly specific. Anti-SSA (Ro) and anti-SSB (La) suggest lupus or primary Sjögren's syndrome. When tests are negative for ANA, several antibodies to cytoplasmic organelles are valuable diagnostic tools, such as anti-J01 for polymyositis syndromes and antiribosome antibodies for lupus, although their sensitivity is modest (20-25%). Finally antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCAs) ensure the diagnosis of small-vessel vasculitides, which often involve the lungs and kidneys. Thus, in diffuse Wegener's granulomatosis, ANCAs exhibiting the classic cytoplasmic pattern and corresponding by ELISA to anti-PR3 are found. In microscopic polyangiitis the ANCAs are peripheral and correspond by ELISA to antimyeloperoxidase antibodies. Tests for other antibodies are less often needed to evaluate inflammatory joint disease.

The use and abuse of commercial kits used to detect autoantibodies

The detection of autoantibodies in human sera is an important approach to the diagnosis and management of patients with autoimmune conditions. To meet market demands, manufacturers have developed a wide variety of easy to use and cost-effective diagnostic kits that are designed to detect a variety of human serum autoantibodies. A number of studies over the past two decades have suggested that there are limitations and concerns in the use and clinical application of test results derived from commercial kits. It is important to appreciate that there is a complex chain of users and circumstances that contributes to variations in the apparent reliability of commercial kits. The goal of this review is to identify the principal links in this chain, to identify the factors that weaken the chain and to propose a plan of resolution. It is suggested that a higher level of commitment and partnership between all of the participants is required to achieve the goal of improving the quality of patient care through the use of autoantibody testing and analysis.

Clinical epidemiology: diagnostic and prognostic tests

Recent studies of diagnostic and prognostic tests have commonly examined serological tests and new imaging techniques. Antifilaggrin antibodies have been found to be highly specific for the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but uncertainty remains about the sensitivity of this test, particularly in early RA. Magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound continue to be explored as methods to detect synovitis and erosions in RA. Several recent studies have confirmed the association between the human leukocyte antigen DRB1 shared epitope and worse radiographic outcomes in patients with RA. Interlaboratory variation in detecting autoantibodies remains a concern, as does overuse of tests for antineutrophil cytoplasmic autoantibodies.

The clinical relevance of autoantibodies in scleroderma

Scleroderma (systemic sclerosis) is associated with several autoantibodies, each of which is useful in the diagnosis of affected patients and in determining their prognosis. Anti-centromere antibodies (ACA) and anti-Scl-70 antibodies are very useful in distinguishing patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) from healthy controls, from patients with other connective tissue disease, and from unaffected family members. Whereas ACA often predict a limited skin involvement and the absence of pulmonary involvement, the presence of anti-Scl-70 antibodies increases the risk for diffuse skin involvement and scleroderma lung disease. Anti-fibrillarin autoantibodies (which share significant serologic overlap with anti-U3-ribonucleoprotein antibodies) and anti-RNA-polymerase autoantibodies occur less frequently and are also predictive of diffuse skin involvement and systemic disease. Anti-Th/To and PM-Scl, in contrast, are associated with limited skin disease, but anti-Th/To might be a marker for the development of pulmonary hypertension. Other autoantibodies against extractable nuclear antigens have less specificity for SSc, including anti-Ro, which is a risk factor for sicca symptoms in patients with SSc, and anti-U1-ribonucleoprotein, which in high titer is seen in patients with SSc/systemic lupus erythematosus/polymyositis overlap syndromes. Limited reports of other autoantibodies (anti-Ku, antiphospholipid) have not established them as being clinically useful in following patients with SSc.