Autoantibody detection in bullous pemphigoid: clinical evaluation of the EUROPLUS™ Dermatology Mosaic

The Need of Differential Diagnosis Between Vulvar Lichen Sclerosus and Autoimmune Dermatoses in Adolescent Girls

INTRODUCTION

Vulvar lichen sclerosus (VLS) is a chronic inflammatory condition affecting the anogenital region, which can manifest in prepubertal or adolescent patients. The prevailing theories point to autoimmune and genetic factors. The primary symptoms of VLS typically include vulvar itching, discomfort, dysuria, and constipation. Physical examination often reveals a characteristic figure 8 pattern, involving the labia minora, clitoral hood, and perianal region. However, these symptoms and the age of onset are nonspecific and require differentiation from autoimmune dermatoses such as bullous diseases, pemphigus diseases, epidermolysis bullosa acquisita, and dermatitis herpetiformis. We performed this study to distinguish VLS from autoimmune dermatoses, and in doing so, uncover the underlying causes of chronic vulvar changes. This knowledge will enable healthcare providers to offer appropriate medical care to affected patients.

METHODS

The study was conducted between July 2020 and February 2021, with a sample of 55 girls aged 2-18 years who did not have any systemic diseases. The study group was composed of 20 girls previously diagnosed with vulvar lichen sclerosus, while the control group included 35 girls without VLS. Questionnaires regarding the medical history of the children were completed by their legal guardians. Blood samples were collected and analyzed biochemically to assess human immunoglobulin A (IgA), IgG, and IgM antibodies against various substrates, including the desmosome of stratum spinosum, basement membrane zone, desmoglein 1 (DSG1), desmoglein 3 (DSG3), BP180-NC16A-4X, BP230gC, pemphigoid antigen, collagen type VII NC1, transitional epithelium, gliadin (GAF-3X), endomysium (EMA), and cellular nucleus (ANA).

RESULTS

The analysis of the study group revealed that the most commonly observed signs and symptoms included: itching, soreness, burning sensations, and excoriation, as well as erythema or/and pallor of the skin and perineal mucosa. Among the assessed antibodies, only anti-GAF3x antibodies and ANA antibodies were detected. However, the results did not reach statistical significance (p > 0.5).

Utility of the pattern-based approach using BIOCHIP-indirect immunofluorescence in the evaluation of subepidermal bullous disorders

BACKGROUND

Subepidermal bullous disorders (SEBD) are a heterogeneous group of vesiculobullous diseases because of antibody-mediated destruction of proteins of the dermo-epidermal junction. Direct immunofluorescence (DIF) is the gold standard for diagnosis. BIOCHIP-indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) is a novel serological test that combines multiple target antigens in a single field. The present study aimed to evaluate the utility of the pattern-based approach in BIOCHIP-IIF for the diagnosis of SEBD.

METHODS

Seventy cases of BIOCHIP-IIF that showed clinical, histopathological, and/or DIF features favoring SEBD were included in the study. The interpretation in the BIOCHIP was categorized into one of the following patterns. Pattern I: basement membrane zone (BMZ) staining in monkey esophagus (ME), primate salt-split skin (SSS)-roof staining, BP180+ and/or BP230+; Pattern II: roof staining in SSS, BP180- and BP230- with or without BMZ staining in ME; Pattern III: floor staining in SSS, BP180- and BP230-; and pattern IV: negative in SSS and other substrates. The findings were correlated with histopathology and/or DIF.

RESULTS

Fifty (71.5%) cases showed pattern I or the typical bullous pemphigoid (BP) pattern. Eight (11.4%) cases showed pattern II. Patterns III and IV were observed in seven (10%) and five (7.1%) cases, respectively. BP was the most common diagnosis in patterns I and II, while anti-p200 pemphigoid was most common in pattern III, as confirmed by immunoblotting. The sensitivity of pattern I in the diagnosis of BP was 96%.

CONCLUSION

BIOCHIP-IIF showed a good correlation with DIF and histopathology in the diagnosis of SEBD. This can be used as a first-line investigation in case of bullous disorders.

The significance of preclinical anti-BP180 autoantibodies

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common autoimmune subepidermal blistering disease. Although the pathomechanism of BP onset has yet to be elucidated in detail, BP autoantibodies targeting two hemidesmosomal components, BP180 and BP230, are known to play a pivotal role in BP pathogenesis. Thus, the detection and measurement of BP autoantibodies are necessary for diagnosing BP and monitoring the disease activity. Immune assays such as immunofluorescence microscopy, immunoblotting, and ELISAs using BP180 and BP230 detect BP autoantibodies in most BP cases with high specificity; however, BP autoantibodies are sometimes detected in BP patients before the onset of this disease. BP autoantibodies that are detected in patients without typical tense blisters are defined as “preclinical BP autoantibodies”. These preclinical BP autoantibodies are detected even in a low percentage of normal healthy individuals. Although the importance of preclinical BP autoantibodies remains elusive, these autoantibodies might be a potential risk factor for subsequent BP development. Therefore, previous comparative epidemiological studies have focused on the prevalence of preclinical BP autoantibodies in populations susceptible to BP (e.g., the elderly) or in diseases with a higher risk of comorbid BP. This mini-review summarizes the literature on the prevalence of preclinical BP autoantibodies in patients with various conditions and diseases, and we discuss the significance of preclinical BP autoantibody detection.

Strategies to Improve Outcomes of Bullous Pemphigoid: A Comprehensive Review of Clinical Presentations, Diagnosis, and Patients' Assessment

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most frequent autoimmune bullous disease mainly affecting elderlies. Diagnosis usually results from clinical features, histological examination, and the quantification of circulating typical autoantibodies, due to its higher incidence in elderly patients, bullous pemphigoid treatment and management still represents a challenge due to the higher frequency of several comorbidities in this group of patients, which may also be linked to a reduced tolerance to BP treatments. Hence, an early diagnosis and a prompt correct treatment are mandatory to reach better clinical outcomes and improve as much as possible BP outcomes. Herein, we carried out a comprehensive literature review about the known clinical presentations, diagnosis, assessment and monitoring procedures used in daily clinical practice in patients with BP, to better define strategies to improve as much as possible BP clinical outcomes.

Comparison of the EUROIMMUN Dermatology Profile ELISA to the novel BIOCHIP Mosaic 7 for the diagnosis of immunobullous skin disease

BACKGROUND

The BIOCHIP is an indirect immunofluorescence diagnostic investigation which identifies multiple autoantibodies with a mosaic panel of target antigen-specific substrates in a single incubation field. The EUROIMMUN Dermatology Profile ELISA allows simultaneous investigation of the six most important autoantibodies in bullous autoimmune dermatoses. Evaluation of the BIOCHIP Mosaic 7, compared to that of the EUROIMMUN Dermatology Profile ELISA, when used as a diagnostic investigation in pemphigus and pemphigoid, was undertaken in an Australian cohort.

METHODS

The serum of 27 patients was analysed including patients with pemphigus vulgaris (n = 10), pemphigus foliaceous (n = 4), bullous pemphigoid (n = 8), mucous membrane pemphigoid (n = 3) and negative controls (n = 2). Results of the BIOCHIP were compared with the EUROIMMUN Dermatology Profile ELISA, as well as with histology, direct immunofluorescence and indirect immunofluorescence.

RESULTS

In pemphigus vulgaris, sensitivity & specificity for the BIOCHIP Mosaic 7 were 100% and 94.1%, comparable to that of the EUROIMMUN Dermatology Profile ELISA with 80% sensitivity and 100% specificity. In bullous pemphigoid, sensitivity of the BIOCHIP was 87.5% and sensitivity of the EUROIMMUN Dermatology ELISA profile was 75%, whilst specificities for both diagnostic methods were 100% in our limited cohort. There was substantial or almost perfect concordance between the BIOCHIP Mosaic 7 and EUROIMMUN Dermatology Profile ELISA for pemphigus vulgaris and bullous pemphigoid.

CONCLUSION

The BIOCHIP Mosaic 7 is a rapid, reliable diagnostic investigation in pemphigus and bullous pemphigoid. Results indicate it is comparable to the EUROIMMUN Dermatology Profile ELISA, whilst also providing additional testing with salt split skin, on one field.

Comparative Analysis of BIOCHIP Mosaic-based Indirect Immunofluorescence with Direct Immunofluorescence in Diagnosis of Autoimmune Bullous Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background

Autoimmune bullous diseases (AIBD) are a heterogeneous group of diseases characterized by autoantibodies against desmosomal proteins in the pemphigus group of disorders and adhesion molecules of the dermal-epidermal junction in pemphigoid group of diseases. Direct immunofluorescence (DIF) establishes the diagnosis of AIBD by demonstrating intercellular deposits of IgG and C3 in case of pemphigus and linear deposits of IgG and C3 along the basement membrane zone (BMZ) in bullous pemphigoid (BP). BIOCHIP mosaic-based indirect immunofluorescence (IIF), a novel diagnostic approach employs detection of characteristic staining pattern and target antigens in a single miniature incubation field.

Aim

To compare the BIOCHIP mosaic-based IIF with DIF in the diagnosis of AIBD.

Materials and Methods

A total of 40 patients of AIBD in the active phase of the disease were included in the study. Skin biopsy was done in these patients for DIF study and serum was subjected to BIOCHIP mosaic-based IIF assay. The results were then compared.

Results

DIF revealed a diagnosis of Pemphigus in 18 patients and BP in 22 patients. BIOCHIP showed a diagnosis of pemphigus in 18 patients, BP in 18 patients and floor pattern staining in four patients, which could be attributed to any of the floor pattern staining subepidermal blistering disease.

Limitations

Small sample size, lack of control group and no comparison made with ELISA.

Conclusion

This study concludes that the result of BIOCHIP shows correlation with the DIF and can be used as a first line-screening tool in the diagnosis of AIBD.

Role of BIOCHIP Indirect Immunofluorescence Test in Cutaneous Vesiculobullous Diseases

BIOCHIP mosaics for indirect immunofluorescence in cutaneous vesiculobullous diseases provide antibody profiles in a single run and can be an alternative to performing multistep assays. There is scanty data regarding their utility. BIOCHIP tests performed over 4 years were compared with biopsy and/or direct immunofluorescence (DIF). Of 209 BIOCHIP tests, 108 were positive. Pemphigus vulgaris and Bullous pemphigoid were the commonest. Dsg3 was the commonest positive substrate in pemphigus group (86%) with 100% sensitivity. Intercellular space pattern on BIOCHIP primate esophagus was seen only in 49%. BP 180 was the commonest positive substrate in pemphigoid (95%) with 78% sensitivity. In 68 cases, corresponding biopsy/DIF was available with concordance of 89% in pemphigus and 93% in pemphigoid groups. In 40 cases where BIOCHIP was positive without biopsy/DIF, 97.5% were concordant with clinical diagnosis. Among the negative results, 13 had biopsy/DIF that were diagnostic. The overall positivity of BIOCHIP was 92% for pemphigus and 84% for pemphigoid groups. Indirect immunofluorescence by BIOCHIP method shows good concordance with histopathology/DIF. However, the sensitivity of some of the substrates varies. It is an effective screening tool to identify cases requiring further ELISA/immunoblots or where biopsy is not feasible.

Comparative Analysis of BIOCHIP Mosaic-Based Indirect Immunofluorescence with Direct Immunofluorescence in Diagnosis of Autoimmune Bullous Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background:

Autoimmune bullous diseases (AIBD) are a heterogeneous group of diseases characterized by autoantibodies against desmosomal proteins in the pemphigus group of disorders and adhesion molecules of the dermal-epidermal junction in pemphigoid group of diseases. Direct immunofluorescence (DIF) establishes the diagnosis of AIBD by demonstrating intercellular deposits of IgG and C3 in case of pemphigus and linear deposits of IgG and C3 along the basement membrane zone (BMZ) in bullous pemphigoid (BP). BIOCHIP mosaic-based indirect immunofluorescence (IIF), a novel diagnostic approach employs detection of characteristic staining pattern and target antigens in a single miniature incubation field.

Aim:

To compare the BIOCHIP mosaic-based IIF with DIF in the diagnosis of AIBD.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 40 patients of AIBD in the active phase of the disease were included in the study. Skin biopsy was done in these patients for DIF study and serum was subjected to BIOCHIP mosaic-based IIF assay. The results were then compared.

Results:

DIF revealed a diagnosis of Pemphigus in 18 patients and BP in 22 patients. BIOCHIP showed a diagnosis of pemphigus in 18 patients, BP in 18 patients and floor pattern staining in four patients, which could be attributed to any of the floor pattern staining subepidermal blistering disease.

Limitations:

Small sample size, lack of control group and no comparison made with ELISA.

Conclusion:

This study concludes that the result of BIOCHIP showed a significant correlation with the DIF and can be used as a first line-screening tool in the diagnosis of AIBD.

Multicenter prospective study on multivariant diagnostics of autoimmune bullous dermatoses using the BIOCHIP technology

BACKGROUND

The current standard in the serologic diagnosis of autoimmune bullous diseases (AIBD) is a multistep procedure sequentially applying different assays. In contrast, the BIOCHIP Mosaic technology combines multiple substrates for parallel analysis by indirect immunofluorescence.

METHODS

Sera from 749 consecutive, prospectively recruited patients with direct immunofluorescence-positive AIBD from 13 international study centers were analyzed independently and blinded by using (1) a BIOCHIP Mosaic including primate esophagus, salt-split skin, rat bladder, monkey liver, monkey liver with serosa, recombinant BP180 NC16A, and gliadin GAF3X, as well as HEK293 cells expressing recombinant desmoglein 1, desmoglein 3, type VII collagen, and BP230 C-terminus and (2) the conventional multistep approach of the Department of Dermatology, University of Lübeck.

RESULTS

In 731 of 749 sera (97.6%), specific autoantibodies could be detected with the BIOCHIP Mosaic, similar to the conventional procedure (725 cases, 96.8%). The Cohen κ for both serologic approaches ranged from 0.84 to 1.00. In 6.5% of sera, differences between the 2 approaches occurred and were mainly attributed to autoantigen fragments not present on the BIOCHIP Mosaic.

LIMITATIONS

Laminin 332 and laminin γ1 are not represented on the BIOCHIP Mosaic.

CONCLUSIONS

The BIOCHIP Mosaic is a standardized time- and serum-saving approach that further facilitates the serologic diagnosis of AIBD.

Validation of the BIOCHIP test for the diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid, pemphigus vulgaris and pemphigus foliaceus

BACKGROUND

The BIOCHIP is a novel multiplex indirect immunofluorescence technique used in the serological diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid and pemphigus. The BIOCHIP method combines the screening of autoantibodies and target antigen-specific substrates in a single miniature incubation field.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the new immunofluorescence BIOCHIP multiplex tool in pemphigus and bullous pemphigoid.

METHODS

For the validation of the BIOCHIP, sera from patients with BP (n = 38), PF (n = 8) and pemphigus vulgaris (PV) (n = 23) were used. In addition, sera from disease control patients (n = 63) and healthy volunteers (n = 39) were used. The multiplex BIOCHIP and direct immunofluorescence (DIF) were performed for all BP, PF and PV patients. Additional indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) was performed on patients with BP, and ELISA was performed on patients with pemphigus.

RESULTS

The BIOCHIP mosaic showed a sensitivity of 86.8% and specificity of 85% for BP180 or BP230 being positive in BP. It demonstrated a sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 97.7% for Dsg1 in PF. The BIOCHIP was found to have a sensitivity of 60.9% and specificity of 73.6% for Dsg3 in PV.

CONCLUSION

The BIOCHIP mosaic-based immunofluorescence test is potentially a simple, time and effort saving test that can aid in the diagnosis and screening of BP, PV and PF. However, there is potential for interpretation bias and a learning curve that needs to be taken into consideration.

Advances in the diagnosis of autoimmune bullous dermatoses

Autoimmune bullous dermatoses are defined by autoantibodies directed against adhesion proteins in the epidermis or basement membrane zone, resulting in blister formation on the skin and mucosa. Diagnosis depends on lesional biopsy for histopathology and perilesional biopsy for direct immunofluorescence. Additional diagnostic methods include indirect immunofluorescence, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and immunoblot (Western blot), which may be selected in specific clinical scenarios due to improved sensitivity and/or specificity. This contribution reviews the available evidence supporting the use of each method to provide a practical reference for clinicians when diagnosing autoimmune bullous disorders. Techniques and cost are reviewed, and newer diagnostic techniques with potential for clinical application are.

Serological Diagnosis of Autoimmune Bullous Skin Diseases

Autoimmune bullous dermatoses (AIBD) encompass a variety of organ-specific autoimmune diseases that manifest with cutaneous and/or mucosal blisters and erosions. They are characterized by autoantibodies targeting structural proteins of the skin, which are responsible for the intercellular contact between epidermal keratinocytes and for adhesion of the basal keratinocytes to the dermis. The autoantibodies disrupt the adhesive functions, leading to splitting and blister formation. In pemphigus diseases, blisters form intraepidermally, whereas in all other disease types they occur subepidermally. Early identification of autoimmune bullous dermatoses is crucial for both treatment and prognosis, particularly as regards tumor-associated disease entities. The diagnosis is based on clinical symptoms, histopathology, direct immunofluorescence to detect antibody/complement deposits, and the determination of circulating autoantibodies. The identification of various target antigens has paved the way for the recent development of numerous specific autoantibody tests. In particular, optimized designer antigens and multiplex test formats for indirect immunofluorescence and ELISA have enhanced and refined the laboratory analysis, enabling highly efficient serodiagnosis and follow-up. This review elaborates on the current standards in the serological diagnostics for autoimmune bullous dermatoses.

Involvement of Nail Apparatus in Pemphigus Vulgaris in Ethnic Poles Is Infrequent

Pemphigus vulgaris lesions have a tendency to localize around natural body orifices. The aim here was to analyze the involvement of nail apparatus in pemphigus vulgaris. Sixty seven ethnic Poles suffering from pemphigus vulgaris on photographic files archiving initial presentation were retrospectively evaluated. Pemphigus vulgaris was diagnosed using combination of clinical data, H+E histology, direct immunofluorescence of plucked scalp hair and/or perilesional tissue also for IgG1 and IgG4 deposits evaluation, indirect immunofluorescence on mosaic substrate and/or monkey esophagus, mono-analyte ELISA with desmoglein 1/3 or multi-analyte ELISA. The nail apparatus involvement was found in 9 of 67 patients (13.4%; 3 females and 6 males). Periungual fingernail lesions were found in 6 patients (2 females, 4 males), whereas periungual toenail lesions in just 3 patients (1 female, 2 males). Our patients nail apparatus changes included, by order of frequency, paronychia, nail discoloration, onychorrhexis, Beau lines, periungual hemorrhages, onychomadesis, cross-ridging, onycholysis, and trachyonychia. The average time between the onset, as recalled by patients, and the diagnosis of pemphigus vulgaris with direct immunofluorescence was not statistically different in PV patients with and without nail apparatus lesions. In this article the molecular and immunological rationale for of periungual involvement is discussed. Our single-center study suggests that nail apparatus involvement is infrequent in pemphigus vulgaris in ethnic Poles. Due to the fact that nail apparatus lesions in pemphigus vulgaris may clinically resemble onychomycosis, giving the proper diagnosis can be difficult particularly when other lesions are overlooked or misinterpreted.

Diagnostic value of autoantibody titres in patients with bullous pemphigoid

BACKGROUND

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common autoimmune blistering disease of the skin requiring skin and serum tests for a precise diagnosis.

OBJECTIVES

We analysed the sensitivity and specificity of BP-relevant parameters and the value of autoantibody titres during follow-up of BP patients.

MATERIALS & METHODS

In a retrospective single-centre study, we included 200 consecutive patients with BP and 400 non-BP patients, and evaluated the test results of patients' serum and skin. In addition, we followed patients' autoantibody titres and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

BP180-ELISA revealed the highest sensitivity (85.0%; specificity: 93.9%), while BP230-ELISA demonstrated the lowest sensitivity (55.5%; specificity: 92.9%). Direct and indirect immunofluorescence showed comparable results for sensitivity (77.2%/72.7%) and specificity (94.9%/93.7%). The sensitivity for skin histology was 76.3% (specificity: 81.3%). Longitudinal analysis showed significant changes in autoantibody titres.

CONCLUSIONS

BP diagnostics should include serum tests for BP autoantibodies and skin immunofluorescence. Skin histology is supportive for diagnosis. Autoantibody titres are markers for disease activity.

Clinical evaluation of a multiparametric ELISA as a rapid tool for routinely diagnosing IgG-mediated autoimmune blistering dermatoses in ethnic Slavs

BACKGROUND

Technical innovation of autoimmune blistering dermatoses (ABDs) diagnosis aimed at multiplex approach. Two multiparametric ELISA tests are commercially available for ABDs serology. The aim was to compare diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric and monospecific ELISAs and to examine the diagnostic value/agreement of multivariant ELISA in compliance with traditional diagnostic setup for ABDs.

METHODS

In total, 128 sera from suspected ABDs patients were studied (27 sera in order to compare ELISAs). Multivariant ELISA (detection of IgG against desmoglein 1 and 3 - DSG1/3; BP180, BP230, envoplakin, type VII collagen), monovariant ELISA, and statistical analysis were performed.

RESULTS

With the use of sera from patients with suspected ABDs, the multiparametric ELISA yield an agreement of 84% with traditional stepwise diagnostics. Multivariant ELISA with BP180 and BP230 showed 87.5% and 80% sensitivity, 87.5% and 91% specificity, 87.5% reliability as well as 87.5% and 80% positive predictive value, 87.5% and 91% negative predictive value, respectively, in relation to monospecific ELISA. Multivariant ELISA with DSG1 and DSG3 showed 50% and 80% sensitivity, 100% and 80% specificity, 85% and 80% reliability as well as 100% and 57% positive predictive value, 82% and 92% negative predictive value, respectively, in relation to monospecific ELISA. A better rate of agreement was observed among ELISA systems with BP180 and BP230, than with ELISA systems with DSG1 and DSG3.

CONCLUSION

Multivariant ELISA test combined with clinical examinations and DIF is recommended as a minimal approach to diagnosing ABDs in ethnic Slavs.

Salivary Samples for the Diagnosis of Pemphigus vulgaris Using the BIOCHIP Approach: a Pilot Study

Pemphigus vulgaris (PV) is a rare autoimmune intraepithelial blistering skin disease characterized by the presence of circulating autoantibodies against desmoglein 3 (DSG3) and desmoglein 1 (DSG1), resulting in loss of the normal epithelial cell-to-cell adhesion, through a process called acantholysis. In recent years, a BIOCHIP-based indirect immunofluorescence technique for the determination of anti-DSG3 and anti-DSG1 autoantibodies has been described. Even though, the use of saliva anti-DSG3 and anti-DSG1 ELISA for the diagnosis of PV has been already reported, there are no studies concerning the utilization of saliva by the BIOCHIP approach. In the present pilot study, ELISA and BIOCHIP were performed, using salivary and serum samples from the same patients to investigate if the detection of anti-desmoglein autoantibodies in salivary samples by BIOCHIP could be used as a test for the diagnosis of PV. There was a strong correlation between ELISA and BIOCHIP results both for anti-DSG3 and anti-DSG1 serum autoantibodies. Autoantibodies to DSG3 were detected in 8 out of 8 salivary samples by ELISA and in 6 out of 8 salivary samples by the BIOCHIP approach. Autoantibodies to DSG1 were negative in all salivary samples using both ELISA and BIOCHIP. There were no positive results in the negative control group. In conclusion, the results of this pilot study indicate lack of correlation between serum and salivary results using both ELISA and BIOCHIP, indicating that saliva may not be the ideal substrate for the laboratory diagnosis of PV using these approaches.

Accuracy of molecular diagnostics in pemphigus and bullous pemphigoid: comparison of commercial and modified mosaic indirect immunofluorescence tests as well as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays

Introduction

Pemphigus and bullous pemphigoid (BP) are identified by autoantibodies (abs) against desmoglein 1, 3 (DSG1/3) and BP180/BP230, respectively. A novel mosaic to indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) using purified BP180 recombinant proteins spotted on slide and transfected cells expressing BP230, DSG1, DSG3 is available. The commercial (IgG detection) and modified (IgG4 detection) mosaic for indirect immunofluorescence (IIFc – IIF commercial, IIFm – IIF modified) and IgG ELISAs were evaluated in pemphigus and bullous pemphigoid (BP) molecular diagnostics.

Aim

To compare diagnostic accuracy of commercial (IgG detection) and modified (IgG4 detection) mosaic IIF assay and to examine the diagnostic value of ELISAs in relation to mosaic IIF in routine laboratory diagnostics of pemphigus and BP.

Material and methods

Sera from 37 BP and 19 pemphigus patients were studied. Associations between tests were assessed using Fisher’s exact test.

Results

There are associations between the positive/negative samples detected by IIFc with desmoglein1 (DSG1)/desmoglein3 (DSG3)/BP230 transfected cells and ELISAs and no association between anti-BP180 IgG detection by IIFc and ELISA. IIFm with DSG1 and DSG3 showed both 100% sensitivity and 100% and 78% specificity, respectively, and 100% and 83% positive predictive value in relation to IIFc. IIFm with BP230 had 87% specificity, 55% sensitivity, whereas IIFm with BP180 had a 100% sensitivity and 13% specificity in relation to IIFc.

Conclusions

The IIFc with DSG1/DSG3/BP230 transfected cells, excluding BP180 spots, is an alternative method to ELISA in pemphigus/BP diagnostics. IgG4 antibodies, both pathogenically and diagnostically important, are inconsistently detectable with IIFm.

Evaluation of ELISA testing for BP180 and BP230 as a diagnostic modality for bullous pemphigoid: a clinical experience

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is a common autoimmune blistering disorder of the elderly. Several diagnostic modalities are available, including clinical impression, histopathology, direct and indirect immunofluorescence, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) detection of pathogenic antibodies. In this study, we aim to examine the utility of the newest test, ELISA, in comparison to the constellation of other tests. We describe our clinical experience in which 170 patients diagnosed with bullous pemphigoid had multiple tests performed. BP180 alone showed a sensitivity of 54 % and specificity of 94 %. The positive predictive value (PPV) is 95 % while the negative predictive value (NPV) is 52 %. BP230 alone yielded a sensitivity of 48 % and specificity of 94 %. The PPV is 94 % and the NPV is 49 %. Using both tests in combination yielded a sensitivity of 66 % and specificity of 89 %. The PPV of at least one of two tests returning positive is 92 % while the NPV of dual negative tests is 58 %. Use of ELISAs for suspected cases of BP are an inadequate standalone test, and are only helpful in making the diagnosis should they return positive. However, they would appear to miss about one-third of cases.

The use of Biochip immunofluorescence microscopy for the serological diagnosis of epidermolysis bullosa acquisita

Epidermolysis bullosa acquisita is a rare autoimmune bullous disease characterized by the presence of circulating antibodies directed against the collagen type VII. Diagnosis is generally based on clinical history, clinical features, histology, direct and indirect immunofluorescence, immunoblotting and ELISA. Our study aims to determine the validity of the Biochip immunofluorescence microscopy for the serological diagnosis of epidermolysis bullosa acquisita. Six patients with epidermolysis bullosa acquisita and presence of antibodies against type VII collagen confirmed by ELISA were included in the study. Subsequently, all sera of patients were analyzed using Biochip. Antibodies anti-collagen type VII were detected in all sera by means of the Biochip technology. Thus, Biochip shows a good correlation with ELISA and seems to be an appropriate method for the diagnosis of epidermolysis bullosa acquisita. It is an easy, fast and standardized method which could facilitate the diagnosis of this autoimmune bullous disease. We suggest that it could be used as an initial screening test to identify patients with epidermolysis bullosa acquisita.

The use of biochip immunofluorescence microscopy for the diagnosis of Pemphigus vulgaris

Pemphigus vulgaris is an autoimmune intraepithelial blistering skin disease characterized by the presence of circulating autoantibodies directed against surfaces of keratinocytes. Diagnosis is generally based on clinical features, histology, direct and indirect immunofluorescence and ELISA. This study describes a new BIOCHIP mosaic-based indirect immunofluorescence technique based on recombinant antigenic substrates and transfected cells. We investigated the diagnostic use of BIOCHIP for the serological diagnosis of Pemphigus vulgaris. Autoantibodies against desmoglein 3 were detected in 97.62% of patients (41/42) with P. vulgaris. There were no positive results in the negative control group. Our study revealed that BIOCHIP has high sensitivity and specificity comparable to that of the ELISA assays. Therefore the BIOCHIP technique seems to be an appropriate method for the diagnosis of P. vulgaris as it has been shown to be a simple, standardized and readily available novel tool, which could facilitate the diagnosis of this autoimmune bullous disease. We suggest that it could be used as an initial screening test to identify patients with P. vulgaris before using the ELISA approach.

Comparative study of direct and indirect immunofluorescence and of bullous pemphigoid 180 and 230 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid

BACKGROUND

Direct immunofluorescence (DIF), indirect immunofluorescence (IIF), and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) are used for the laboratory diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid (BP).

OBJECTIVE

The diagnostic value of DIF and IIF on rabbit and monkey esophagus or human salt-split skin and commercial ELISAs was assessed.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective study where 313 patients with BP were compared with 488 control subjects.

RESULTS

DIF was the most sensitive test (90.8%) whereas sensitivities for IIF on rabbit esophagus, IIF on monkey esophagus, IIF on salt-split skin, BP180 ELISA, and BP230 ELISA were 76.0%, 73.2%, 73.3%, 72.0%, and 59.0%, respectively. The sensitivity of the serologic tests was 88.8% altogether. The specificities for DIF, IIF on rabbit esophagus, IIF on monkey esophagus, IIF on salt-split skin, BP180 ELISA, and BP230 ELISA were 98%, 96.5%, 97.1%, 100%, 94.1%, and 99.2%, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

The retrospective nature of study was a limitation. Correlation of diagnostic data with clinical manifestations or disease course was not possible.

CONCLUSIONS

In suspected BP, both serologic tests and DIF have to be performed because of a sensitivity issue. Although the ELISAs had a relatively low sensitivity, the serologic tests altogether almost reached the level of sensitivity of DIF. The specificities of all assays were excellent.

Bullous skin diseases: classical types of autoimmune diseases

The prototypic bullous skin diseases, pemphigus vulgaris, pemphigus foliaceus, and bullous pemphigoid, are characterized by the blister formation in the skin and/or oral mucosa in combination with circulating and deposited autoantibodies reactive with (hemi)desmosomes. Koch's postulates, adapted for autoimmune diseases, were applied on these skin diseases. It appears that all adapted Koch's postulates are fulfilled, and, therefore, these bullous skin diseases are to be considered classical autoimmune diseases within the wide and expanding spectrum of autoimmune diseases.

Association of autoantibodies to BP180 with disease activity in Greek patients with bullous pemphigoid

39 bullous pemphigoid (BP) patients were studied to assess the clinical significance of anti-BP180 and anti-BP230 circulating autoantibodies of BP and correlate their titers with the clinical scores of the BP Disease Area Index (BPDAI) and the Autoimmune Bullous Skin Disorder Intensity Score (ABSIS) as well as with the intensity of pruritus measured by the BPDAI pruritus component. All parameters were evaluated by the time of diagnosis (baseline), month 3, and month 6. Titers of anti-BP180 autoantibodies were strongly correlated with BPDAI (r = 0.557, P value < 0.0001) and ABSIS (r = 0.570, P value < 0.0001) values, as well as with BPDAI component for the intensity of pruritus (rho = 0.530, P value = 0.001) at baseline. At month 3, titers of anti-BP180 autoantibodies were strongly correlated with BPDAI (rho = 0.626, P value = 0.000) and ABSIS (rho = 0.625, P value = 0.000) values, as well as with the BPDAI component for the intensity of pruritus (rho = 0.625, P value = 0.000). At month 6, titers of anti-BP180 autoantibodies were strongly correlated with BPDAI (rho = 0.527, P value = 0.001) and ABSIS (rho = 0.526, P value = 0.001) values, as well as with the BPDAI component for the intensity of pruritus (rho = 0.525, P value = 0.001). There was no statistically significant correlation between titers of anti-BP230 autoantibodies and the BPDAI, ABSIS, and BPDAI component for the intensity of pruritus at the same time points.