Diagnostic performance of a commercial immunoblot assay for myositis antibody testing

Identification of connective tissue disease autoantibodies and a novel autoantibody anti-annexin A11 in patients with "idiopathic" interstitial lung disease

BACKGROUND

Autoantibodies are a hallmark feature of Connective Tissue Diseases (CTD). Their presence in patients with idiopathic interstitial lung disease (ILD) may suggest covert CTD. We aimed to determine the prevalence of CTD autoantibodies in patients diagnosed with idiopathic ILD.

METHODS

499 patient sera were analysed: 251 idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), 206 idiopathic non-specific interstitial pneumonia (iNSIP) and 42 cryptogenic organising pneumonia (COP). Autoantibody status was determined by immunoprecipitation.

RESULTS

2.4% of IPF sera had a CTD-autoantibody compared to 10.2% of iNSIP and 7.3% of COP. 45% of autoantibodies were anti-synthetases. A novel autoantibody targeting an unknown 56 kDa protein was found in seven IPF patients (2.8%) and two NSIP (1%) patients. This was characterised as anti-annexin A11.

CONCLUSION

Specific guidance on autoantibody testing and interpretation in patients with ILD could improve diagnostic accuracy. Further work is required to determine the clinical significance of anti-annexin A11.

Positive predictive value of myositis antibody line blot testing in patients with suspected idiopathic inflammatory myopathy

INTRODUCTION/AIMS

Line blot (LB) is in widespread use for myositis antibody detection. Yet, studies of its positive predictive value (PPV) in patients with suspected idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM), which would be of particular relevance to neuromuscular clinicians, are lacking. We aimed to determine the PPV of myositis antibody LB testing in patients with suspected IIM, and examine whether PPV was significantly impacted by intensity of antibody positivity.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent myositis antibody LB testing for suspected IIM between March 2019 and August 2022.

RESULTS

Of 70 patients who underwent testing for suspected IIM and had positive myositis antibody LB results, 43 (61%) were female and the median age was 61 years (range: 10-83 years). Forty-four were classified as true-positives, yielding a PPV of 63%. The PPV of patients with weak-positive myositis antibody results (14/30, 47%) was significantly lower than the PPV of patients with moderate-positive or strong-positive myositis antibody results (30/40, 75%) (p = .02).

DISCUSSION

Our study found that myositis antibody LB testing in patients with suspected IIM had a modest PPV, underscoring the need for antibody interpretation in the context of all available clinical and ancillary test data to avoid misdiagnosis. The significantly lower PPV in patients with weak-positive results emphasizes the particular importance of clinical correlation in such patients. Further study into the diagnostic performance of various LBs for myositis antibody detection is needed to inform their interpretation in clinical practice.

Diagnosis and subtyping of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: caution required in the use of myositis autoantibodies

Detection of myositis autoantibodies (MAs) has utility in both the diagnosis and subtyping of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs). Multiplex assays such as the Euroimmun line immunoassay (LIA) have significant limitations in rare diseases like IIM. A retrospective cohort study was performed on positive MA detected on LIA in 171 patients using the manufacturer's recommended cut-off. Only 16.7% were deemed true positive after clinical correlation. Autoantibody-specific cut-offs were created and applied to the original cohort, along with generically applied higher cut-offs. Positive predictive value (PPV) improved, but there was variable increase in false negatives. False positive MA results are common using LIA, but locally derived cut-offs can improve performance. Clinicians must be aware of the limitations of LIA, which is the commonest method for MA detection in Australasia.

What should we expect when two myositis-specific antibodies coexist in a patient

BACKGROUND

The coexistence of two myositis-specific autoantibodies (MSA) is considered extremely rare. We describe three patients with both anti-signal recognition particle (SRP) antibodies and another MSA in serum.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective clinical data collection and follow-up studies of the clinical manifestations and treatment outcome of three patients positive with anti-SRP antibodies and other MSAs. IgG antibodies against MSAs were detected using commercial line immunoblot assay.

RESULTS

The tests of MSA showed positive result of anti-SRP antibodies and another one MSA including anti-TIF1-γ, anti-Jo1, or anti-EJ antibodies, respectively. The proximal muscle weakness appeared in 2 patients; interstitial lung disease presented in 2 patients. The serum CK level was elevated in 1 patient. The muscle biopsy showed necrotizing myopathy in 1 patient and deposition of membrane attack complex on scattered myofibers in the other one patient. One of the two patients with interstitial lung disease died because of respiratory failure. One patient had completely improved and the other one showed partial remission after immunosuppressive therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients with anti-SRP antibodies co-occurred with the other MSA may have various clinical characteristics. The clinicopathological phenotypes of these patients seem to be mainly caused by one of the MSAs, namely the responsible antibody.

Myositis-related autoantibody profile and clinical characteristics stratified by anti-cytosolic 5'-nucleotidase 1A status in connective tissue diseases

INTRODUCTION/AIMS

Cytosolic 5'-nucleotidase 1A (cN-1A) autoantibodies have been recognized as myositis-related autoantibodies. However, their correlations with clinical characteristics and other myositis-specific and myositis-associated autoantibodies (MSAs/MAAs) are still unclear. We aimed to establish the prevalence and clinical and laboratory associations of cN-1A autoantibodies in a cohort of patients with connective tissue diseases.

METHODS

A total of 567 participants (182 idiopathic inflammatory myopathies [IIM], 164 systemic lupus erythematosus [SLE], 121 systemic sclerosis [SSc], and 100 blood donors [BD]) were tested for the presence of cN-1A autoantibodies and other myositis-specific and myositis-associated autoantibodies (MSAs/MAAs). Clinical and laboratory characteristics were compared between anti-cN-1A positive and negative patients with sporadic inclusion body myositis (sIBM) and between anti-cN-1A positive and negative patients with non-IBM IIM.

RESULTS

In the sIBM cohort, 30 patients (46.9%) were anti-cN-1A positive vs. 18 (15.2%) in the non-IBM IIM cohort, 17 (10%) were anti-cN-1A positive in the SLE cohort and none in the SSc or the BD cohorts. Anti-cN-1A positivity had an overall sensitivity of 46.9% and a specificity of 93.2% for sIBM. Dysphagia was more frequent in the anti-cN-1A positive vs. negative sIBM patients (p = .04). In the non-IBM IIM group, being anti-cN-1A antibody positive was associated with the diagnosis polymyositis (p = .04) and overlap-myositis (p = .04) and less disease damage evaluated by physician global damage score (p < .001).

DISCUSSION

cN-1A autoantibodies were predominantly found in IIM patients and was associated with dysphagia in sIBM patients. Notably, anti-cN-1A appears to identify a distinct phenotype of anti-cN-1A positive non-IBM IIM patients with a milder disease course.

Myositis Autoantibodies in Patients with Suspected Post-Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome

Most patients suffering from Lyme disease are effectively treated with antibiotics. In some patients, however, problems persist for a long time despite appropriate therapy. The term post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome (PTLDS) is currently used for this condition in scientific literature. The pathogenesis is still not precisely known, but the involvement of immunopathological mechanisms is assumed. In our study, we analyzed the presence of autoantibodies including myositis-specific (MSA) and myositis-associated autoantibodies (MAA) in patients with laboratory proven history of Lyme disease and with clinical symptoms of PTLDS. A total of 59 patients meeting the criteria for PTLDS were enrolled in this study. The control group consisted of 40 patients undergoing differential diagnosis of neurological disorders without clinical and/or laboratory-proven history of Lyme disease. The presence of autoantibodies was determined by immunoblot methods and positive samples were further tested for serum creatine kinase (CK) and myoglobin levels. The presence of myositis autoantibodies was detected in 18 subjects with suspected PTLDS (30.5%), but only in 5% of control subjects exhibiting no evidence of Lyme disease history. The difference was statistically significant (p = 0.002). The subsequent biochemical analysis of muscle-damage markers in positive subjects found a mild elevation in six MSA/MAA-positive PTLDS patients. The study detected raised MSA/MAA autoantibodies formation in the group of PTLDS patients raising the question about their involvement in the pathogenesis of this syndrome.

The use of ELISA is comparable to immunoprecipitation in the detection of selected myositis-specific autoantibodies in a European population

Background

The reliable detection of myositis-specific autoantibodies (MSA) provides valuable clinical information regarding prognosis, clinical progression and diagnostic confirmation.

Objectives

To evaluate the reliability of a commercial ELISA immunoassay in detecting myositis-specific autoantibodies in comparison to immunoprecipitation as the reference standard.

Methods

Serum samples were chosen from a biobank of more than 3000 samples. Samples with a confirmed MSA on Immunoprecipitation (n=116) were evaluated in duplicate by ELISA to detect Mi2, MDA5, Jo1, EJ, KS, PL-7 and PL-12 (Medical &amp; Biological Laboratories Co. Ltd, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan). Healthy control samples (n=246) confirmed autoantibody negative by immunoprecipitation were similarly assessed.

Results

There was a very good agreement between ELISA and immunoprecipitation for serum samples containing anti-Mi2, MDA5, Jo1, EJ, KS and PL-7 and PL-12 auto-antibodies. Cohen’s κ values ranged from 0.86-1 for the measured autoantibodies on ELISA.

Conclusion

ELISA was an accurate method for detecting anti-synthetase, anti-Mi2 and anti-MDA5 autoantibodies.

Myositis Antibodies and Interstitial Lung Disease

BACKGROUND

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) comprises a heterogeneous group of inflammatory and fibrotic conditions, often resulting in progressive lung function decline and increased mortality. Connective tissue disease (CTD) should be considered in all patients with ILD, as distinguishing between CTD-ILD and other forms of fibrotic lung disease has important therapeutic and prognostic implications. The idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) represent a CTD subtype of growing interest to ILD experts. The expansion and availability of myositis-specific and myositis-associated antibody testing has allowed for improved disease detection and characterization.

CONTENT

In this review, we highlight the relationship between myositis antibodies and ILD. Select forms of IIM, such as the antisynthetase syndrome and clinically amyopathic dermatomyositis can present with rapidly progressive ILD, warranting timely disease diagnosis and management. Disease phenotypes, prevalence, laboratory testing, prognosis, and management strategies are described according to select myositis antibodies.

SUMMARY

Myositis antibodies provide valuable information for clinicians managing patients with ILD. This review aims to increase awareness of their role in disease detection, pathophysiology, and possibly therapeutics.

Diagnosis of myositis-associated interstitial lung disease: Utility of the myositis autoantibody line immunoassay

OBJECTIVES

The detection of myositis autoantibodies (MA) in patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) has major implications for diagnosis and management, especially amyopathic and forme frustes of idiopathic inflammatory myositis-associated ILD (IIM-ILD). Use of the MA line immunoblot assay (MA-LIA) in non-rheumatological cohorts remains unvalidated. We assessed the diagnostic performance of the MA-LIA and explored combined models with clinical variables to improve identification of patients with IIM-ILD.

METHODS

Consecutive patients referred to a specialist ILD clinic, with ILD-diagnosis confirmed at multidisciplinary meeting, and MA-LIA performed within six months of baseline were included. Pre-specified MA-LIA thresholds were evaluated for IIM-ILD diagnosis.

RESULTS

A total 247 ILD patients were included (IIM-ILD n = 12, non-IIM connective tissue disease-associated ILD [CTD-ILD] n = 52, idiopathic interstitial pneumonia [IIP] n = 115, other-ILD n = 68). Mean age was 64.8 years, with 45.3% female, mean FVC 75.5% and DLCO 59.2% predicted. MA were present in 13.8% overall and 83.3% of IIM-ILD patients. The most common MA in IIM-ILD and non-IIM ILD patients were anti-Jo-1 (prevalence 40%) and anti-PMScl (29.2%) autoantibodies respectively. The pre-specified low-positive threshold (>10 signal intensity) had the highest discriminative capacity for IIM-ILD (AUC 0.86). Combining MA-LIA with age, gender, clinical CTD-manifestations and an overlap non-specific interstitial pneumonia/organising pneumonia pattern on HRCT improved discrimination for IIM-ILD (AUC 0.96).

CONCLUSION

The MA-LIA is useful to support a diagnosis of IIM-ILD as a complement to multi-disciplinary ILD assessment. Clinical interpretation is optimised by consideration of the strength of the MA-LIA result together with clinical and radiological features of IIM-ILD.

Performance of myositis-specific antibodies detected on myositis line immunoassay to diagnose and sub-classify patients with suspected idiopathic inflammatory myopathy, a retrospective records-based review

AIM

To evaluate myositis line immunoassay (LIA) for diagnosis and sub-classification of suspected idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM). To investigate if test performance is improved by increasing signal strength cut-off for myositis-specific antibody (MSA) or combining MSA with indirect immunofluorescence (IIF).

METHODS

A retrospective, consecutive case series of patients investigated for MSAs from June 2013 to June 2020 for suspected IIM. Specificity, sensitivity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated with 95% confidence intervals for diagnosis of IIM. Association of IIM diagnosis with increased signal strength and presence of an expected IIF pattern on Hep-2 cells was assessed by Fisher's exact test in MSA-positive patients.

RESULTS

A total of 195 patients were evaluated. IIM was diagnosed in 32/195 (16.4%) patients. MSAs were detected in 41/195 (21%) patients, 18/41 (43.9%) patients with an MSA had a diagnosis of IIM. The probability of an IIM diagnosis was increased in MSA-positive patients with high compared with low signal strength (83.3% vs 43.5%; P = 0.01) and an expected compared with unexpected IIF pattern (61.5% vs 23.8%; P = 0.04). Specificity for IIM was not significantly improved by increasing signal strength cut-off (85.9% vs 93.8%). Positive predictive value of myositis LIA was only modest and not significantly improved by either increasing signal strength cut-off or requiring an expected IIF pattern for determination of MSA positivity (43.9% vs 60% vs 61.5%). Sub-classification of IIM correlated closely for respective MSAs (88.9%).

CONCLUSION

Increased MSA signal strength on myositis LIA and the presence of an expected IIF pattern were associated with IIM diagnosis. Test performance was non-significantly improved by these methods. Prevalence of IIM in this patient cohort was low; it is not excluded that LIA performance could be improved by these methods in a higher prevalence cohort.

Lack of standardisation in interpretation and reporting of autoantibody assays: a survey analysis of Australasian laboratories with focus on line immunoassays

Autoantibody assays are reported in a variety of formats. Results only slightly above established cut-offs provide lower likelihood ratios; therefore, their clinical significance may be more uncertain, which is not readily communicated with dichotomous qualitative reporting. Line immunoassays (LIA) are a common method for detecting antibodies to extractable nuclear antigens (ENA) and myositis-associated antibodies. However, recommended positive cut-offs are contentious. We distributed a survey via e-mail to participants in the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Program (RCPAQAP) Immunology modules and to a dedicated immunology mailing list in Australasia. Questions explored general viewpoints surrounding autoantibody reporting, as well as current laboratory practices, with particular focus on interpretation and reporting of the most commonly used ENA LIA manufactured by Euroimmun. There were 31 responders, representative of at least 17 unique laboratories across Australia (8 public, 5 private) and New Zealand (4 laboratories). Responses suggest that autoantibody reporting is not standardised; there was variation in general viewpoints and reporting practices, particularly regarding the interpretation of and positive cut-offs used for the Euroimmun ENA LIA, which were contrary to the manufacturer's guidelines in a majority of the responses. Interpretative qualitative reporting based on results from other investigations and the clinical history was a common theme. There is large variation in the reporting of autoantibody assays within Australasia, especially by LIA. A majority of respondents report the most commonly used ENA LIA contrary to manufacturer's guidelines; alternative positive cut-offs are commonly utilised. LIA reports should indicate the level of positivity to enhance their relevance in the clinical decision-making process.

Detection of multiple myositis-specific autoantibodies in unique patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathy: A single centre-experience and literature review: Systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Myositis-specific autoantibodies (MSAs) are thought to be mutually exclusive in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) based on studies with immunoprecipitation-based (IP) detection methods. Recently, detection of multiple MSAs in unique patients is increasingly reported, but the extent of this phenomenon remains unclear.

METHODS

At our centre, we reviewed results from two line immunoassays and one dot immunoassay in 145 IIM patients and 240 controls for the presence of multiple MSAs. Pubmed and Embase were systematically searched for articles mentioning detection of multiple MSAs in IIM patients, published until February 2019. We assessed the frequency, detection method, the precise combinations and clinical phenotypes of participants with multiple MSAs.

RESULTS

At our centre, detection of multiple MSAs occurred in 3.4-8.3% of patients with IIM, depending on the assay. However, no cases with full concordance across all three assays were identified. Forty-four articles reported detection of multiple MSAs, representing a total of 133 cases, including four patients with a connective tissue disease other than IIM and two healthy controls. In 101 cases all MSAs were detected using only one detection method: 40 cases with IP-based methods (most frequently used technique) and 61 cases with other assay types. In most cases the phenotype of patients with multiple MSAs matched the predicted presentation associated with one MSA and in few cases the phenotype matched with both MSAs.

CONCLUSION

Detection of multiple MSAs in unique IIM patients is less rare than commonly accepted. Specificity issues of the commercially available multiplex immunoassays may, at least partly, explain the higher frequency compared to IP-based methods. 'True multiple MSA-positive' patients may exist, though they are most likely rare.

A comprehensive clinical and laboratory evaluation of 224 patients with persistent symptoms attributed to presumed tick-bite exposure

BACKGROUND

Persistent symptoms attributed to presumed tick-bite exposure constitute an unresolved medical controversy. We evaluated whether Swedish adults who met the criteria for post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome (PTLDS) exhibited characteristics distinguishable from adults who did not, but who displayed similar symptoms and disease course after suspected previous tick-bite infection (TBI).

METHODS AND FINDINGS

During 2015-2018, 255 patients-referred to the Centre for Vector-borne Infections, Uppsala University Hospital, Sweden with symptoms lasting longer than six months-were recruited. Of this group, 224 completed the study. Each patient was examined by an infectious disease specialist and, besides a full medical history, underwent a panel of blood and cerebrospinal fluid laboratory tests including hematological, biochemical, microbiological and immunological analyses, and the RAND-36 scale to measure quality of life. For analysis purposes, patients were divided into five subgroups, of which one represented PTLDS. According to serological results indicating TBI and documented/ reported objective signs of Lyme disease, 85 (38%) patients fulfilled the criteria for PTLDS and were compared with the other 139 (62%) serologically classified patients. In the PTLDS group, erythema chronicum migrans (ECM) was documented/reported in 86% of patients, previous neuroborreliosis in 15%, and acrodermatitis chronica atroficans (ACA) in 3.5%. However, there were no significant differences regarding symptoms, laboratory results or disease course between patients with PTLDS and those without laboratory evidence of Borrelia exposition. Most reported symptoms were fatigue-related (70%), musculoskeletal (79%), neurological (82%) and neurocognitive (57%). Tick bites were recalled by 74%. The RAND-36 score was significantly below that of the general Swedish population. Signs of immunological/inflammatory reactivity with myositis antibodies were detected in 20% of patients, fibrinogen levels were moderately increased in 21% and elevated rheumatoid factor in 6%.

CONCLUSIONS

The PTLDS group did not differ exclusively in any respect from the other subgroups, which either lacked previously documented/reported evidence of borreliosis or even lacked detectable serological signs of exposure to Lyme disease. The results suggest that symptoms often categorized as Chronic-Lyme-Disease (CLD) in the general debate, cannot be uniquely linked to Lyme disease. However, approximately 20% of the total group of patients showed signs of autoimmunity. Further studies are needed to elucidate the underlying causes and mechanisms of PTLDS and there is reason to consider a multifactorial approach.

Dermatomyositis autoantibodies: how can we maximize utility?

The past 15 years has seen significant advances in the characterization of myositis-specific autoantibodies (MSAs) and their associated phenotypes in patients with dermatomyositis (DM). As more careful studies are performed, it is clear that unique combinations of clinical and pathological phenotypes are associated with each MSA, despite the fact that there is considerable heterogeneity within antibody classes as well as overlap across the groups. Because risk for interstitial lung disease (ILD), internal malignancy, adverse disease trajectory, and, potentially response to therapy differ by DM MSA group, a deeper understanding of MSAs and validation and standardization of assays used for detection are critical for optimizing diagnosis and treatment. Like any test, the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of assays for various MSAs is not perfect. Currently tests for MSAs are helpful at minimum for a clinician to assess relative risk or contribute to diagnosis and perhaps counsel the appropriate patient about what to expect. With international standardization and larger studies it is likely that more antibody tests will make their way into formal schemata for diagnosis and actionable risk assessment in DM. In this review, we summarize key considerations for interpreting the clinical and pathologic associations with MSA in DM and identify critical gaps in knowledge and practice that will maximize their clinical utility and utility for understanding disease pathogenesis.

Anti-TIF-1γ Antibody Detection Using a Commercial Kit vs In-House Immunoblot: Usefulness in Clinical Practice

Objectives

Anti-TIF-1γ autoantibody detection is important for cancer screening in patients with dermatomyositis. The gold standard for anti-TIF-1γ detection, immunoprecipitation, is only available from a few specialized laboratories worldwide, so commercial ELISA/immunoblot tests have emerged in recent years. To analyze their usefulness in diagnosing cancer-associated dermatomyositis, we compared Euroimmun Euroline profile with our previously validated in-house immunoblot assay with human recombinant TIF-1γ.

Methods

We included 308 adult patients from Hospital de la Santa Creu I Sant Pau and Vall Hebrón Hospital (Barcelona, Spain) tested for anti-TIF-1γ autoantibodies using the Euroline profile and an in-house immunoblot assay.

Results

A total of 27 anti-TIF-1γ were detected by the Euroline and 12 by the in-house assay. Fair agreement was observed between Euroline and the in-house immunoblot Cohen’s kappa 0.3163. Expected prevalence of anti-TIF-1γ autoantibodies was observed for the two methods for dermatomyositis and undifferentiated connective tissue diseases, but unexpectedly high prevalence of anti-TIF-1γ autoantibodies was detected by Euroline compared to the in-house immunoblot for other diseases (16.5% Euroline vs 0.8% in-house immunoblot, p<0.01). The in-house IB compared to Euroline more reliably detected cancer in patients with DM with anti-TIF-1γ antibodies (p=0.0014 vs p=0.0502 for in-house immunoblot vs Euroline).

Conclusion

We recommend using a second validated method to confirm Euroline-detected anti-TIF-1γ antibodies when the dermatomyositis diagnosis is not definitive. Furthermore, in the context of definite DM diagnosis with negative anti-TIF-1γ antibodies by Euroline and no other myositis specific antibody, is also recommendable to confirm by a second validated method.

The reliability of immunoassays to detect autoantibodies in patients with myositis is dependent on autoantibody specificity

Objectives

In order to address the reliability of commercial assays to identify myositis-specific and -associated autoantibodies, we aimed to compare the results of two commercial immunoassays with the results obtained by protein immunoprecipitation.

Methods

Autoantibody status was determined using radio-labelled protein immunoprecipitation for patients referred to our laboratory for myositis autoantibody characterization. For each autoantibody of interest, the sera from 25 different patients were analysed by line blot (Euroline Myositis Antigen Profile 4, EuroImmun, Lübeck, Germany) and dot blot (D-Tek BlueDiver, Diagnostic Technology, Belrose, NSW, Australia). Sera from 134 adult healthy controls were analysed.

Results

Overall commercial assays performed reasonably well, with high agreement (Cohen’s κ >0.8). Notable exceptions were the detection of rarer anti-synthetases with κ < 0.2 and detection of anti-TIF1γ, where κ was 0.70 for the line blot and 0.31 for dot blot. Further analysis suggested that the proportion of patients with anti-TIF1γ may recognize a conformational epitope, limiting the ability of blotting-based assays that utilize denatured antigen to detect this clinically important autoantibody. A false-positive result occurred in 13.7% of samples analysed by line blot and 12.1% analysed by dot blot.

Conclusion

The assays analysed do not perform well for all myositis-specific and -associated autoantibodies and overall false positives are relatively common. It is crucial that clinicians are aware of the limitations of the methods used by their local laboratory. Results must be interpreted within the clinical context and immunoprecipitation should still be considered in selected cases, such as apparently autoantibody-negative patients where anti-synthetase syndrome is suspected.

Identification of a unique anti-Ro60 subset with restricted serological and molecular profiles

Anti-Ro60 is one of the most common and clinically important serum autoantibodies that has a number of diagnostic and predictive capabilities. Most diagnostic laboratories report this simply as a qualitative positive/negative result. The objective of this study was to examine the clinical and serological relevance of a novel subset of anti-Ro60 in patients who display low levels of anti-Ro60 (anti-Ro60^low ). We retrospectively identified anti-Ro60 sera during a 12-month period at a major immunopathology diagnostic laboratory in Australia. These all were anti-Ro60-precipitin-positive on the diagnostic gold standard counter-immuno-electrophoresis (CIEP). Lineblot immunoassay was used to stratify patients into either anti-Ro60^low or anti-Ro60^high subsets. We compared the medical and laboratory parameters associated with each group. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and mass spectrometry techniques were used to analyse the serological and molecular basis behind the two subsets. Anti-Ro60^low patients displayed less serological activity than anti-Ro60^high patients with less intermolecular spreading, hypergammaglobulinaemia and less tendency to undergo anti-Ro60 isotype-switching than anti-Ro60^high patients. Mass spectrometric typing of the anti-Ro60^low subset showed restricted variable heavy chain subfamily usage and amino acid point mutations. This subset also displayed clinical relevance, being present in a number of patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARD). We identify a novel anti-Ro60^low patient subset that is distinct from anti-Ro60^high patients serologically and molecularly. It is not clear whether they arise from common or separate origins; however, they probably have different developmental pathways to account for the stark difference in immunological maturity. We hence demonstrate significance to anti-Ro60^low and justify accurate detection in the diagnostic laboratory.

Myositis autoantibodies: recent perspectives

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of recent discoveries related to myositis-specific autoantibodies (MSAs) and assays used for their measurement.

RECENT FINDINGS

New autoantibody specificities have been reported including a MSA directed against eukaryotic initiation factor 3 and a myositis-associated autoantibody directed against heat shock factor 1. The association of anti-TIF1γ with cancer-associated dermatomyositis dependent on age has been confirmed in several large cohorts. Despite MSAs being almost entirely mutually exclusive, several myositis autoantigens are overexpressed in regenerating muscle and do not correlate with the corresponding MSA in any one patient. Further mechanisms may determine the final MSA specificity and are likely to include the need for autoantigen processing and presentation with adaptive T-cell help. The presence of CD4-positive T cells specific for histidyl tRNA synthetase protein in bronchial lavage fluid from antisynthetase patients lends support to this view. Finally, it is widely held that MSA do play an important role in clinical practice among some evidence and concern about commercial assay reliability.

SUMMARY

MSAs continue to provide important tools for clinical diagnosis and management as well as insights into disease mechanisms. Further improvement in the standardization and reliability of routine detection of MSAs is a high priority.

Extended myositis-specific and -associated antibodies profile in systemic sclerosis: A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

In systemic sclerosis (SSc) and idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM), auto-antibodies are used in daily practice as potent biomarkers of clinical phenotypes. This study aimed at estimating the prevalence of myositis-specific (MSA) and myositis-associated (MAA) auto-antibodies in a well-characterised SSc patients cohort using two different immunoblot assays, and studying their clinical associations.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, the sera of 300 consecutive patients were tested at the same time with myositis antibodies Euroimmun® and D-tek® immunoblot assays.

RESULTS

Prevalence of MSA/MAA, MSA and MAA were 17.0%, 8.0% and 9.7%, respectively. When combining results of both tests, anti-PM/Scl 100 were found in 5.0% (95% confidence interval 2.8; 8.1); anti-PM/Scl 75 and anti-TIF1γ in 3.7% (1.8; 6.5); anti-Ku 3.0% (1.4; 5.6); anti-MDA5 in 1.3% (0.4; 3.4); anti-Mi-2 β, anti-NXP2, anti-PL-7 and anti-SRP in 0.7% (0.08; 2.4); anti-EJ and anti-PL-12 in 0.3% (0.01; 1.8) of patients. No reactivity against SAE1, Jo-1 or OJ was observed. Anti-PM/Scl 75 antibodies were associated with interstitial lung disease (80% vs. 42%) and myositis (27% vs. 3%); anti-Ku antibodies were associated with myositis (33% vs. 3%).

CONCLUSION

In this cross-sectional study of 300 SSc patients, the prevalence of MSA/MAA, MSA and MAA using immunoblot assays were 17.0%, 8.0% and 9.7%, respectively. MAA positivity was associated with ILD and myositis, but this study did not highlight any clinical associations with MSA positivity.

The promise, perceptions, and pitfalls of immunoassays for autoantibody testing in myositis

Background

A myositis-specific autoantibody can now be identified in the majority of patients with myositis. They identify homogeneous patient subgroups and are key tools in developing a personalized approach to disease management. There is substantial clinical interest in exploiting myositis autoantibodies as biomarkers, and consequently, a large number of commercial assays have been developed for their detection. These assays are already in widespread clinical use. In order to better understand perceived concerns from the international myositis community in relation to the reliability of these assays and how they are being used, we conducted a survey of international myositis experts, all of whom were members of the International Myositis Assessment and Clinical Studies group.

Results

We collected data on the types of assay used, manufacturers, and the nature of the report provided by different laboratories and received 111 complete responses. Respondents also provided information on how they used the different assays, their confidence in the results, and how this influenced their clinical practice. Enzyme immunoassay/ELISA was the most popular assay method used worldwide followed by line blot. Line blot was the most popular method used in Europe. Despite concerns from over 80% of respondents regarding false-positive and false-negative results with the assay used by their laboratory, over 80% reported that the identification of a myositis autoantibody influenced their diagnostic confidence, the information they provided to a patient, and their recommended treatment.

Conclusions

In spite of ongoing concerns from the majority of users regarding the reliability of the results, myositis-specific autoantibody testing, using commercial immunoassays, is being used globally to inform clinical decision-making. These findings highlight the need for urgent guidance on the use of myositis autoantibody testing and on the interpretation of results. Knowledge of the reliability of currently available assays is essential given the importance already placed on myositis-specific autoantibodies as clinical decision-making tools.

Performance evaluation of a commercial line blot assay system for detection of myositis- and systemic sclerosis-related autoantibodies

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

A line blot (LB) assay is a multi-analyte platform capable of simultaneously detecting multiple anti-nuclear antibody specificities. Here, we evaluated the performance of a commercial LB assay developed for the identification of myositis- or systemic sclerosis (SSc)-related autoantibodies (autoAbs).

METHOD

We screened 300 serum samples from patients with various connective tissue diseases using an LB assay and compared the results of myositis- or SSc-related autoAbs with those identified by RNA and protein immunoprecipitation (IP) assays or indirect immunofluorescence (IIF).

RESULTS

The IP assays revealed anti-Jo-1 Abs in 14 patients, anti-EJ Abs in 12, anti-PL-7 Abs in 8, anti-PL-12 Abs in 4, anti-Mi-2 Abs in 6, anti-SRP Abs in 8, anti-topoisomerase I Abs in 54, anti-RNA polymerase III Abs in 24, anti-U3 RNP Abs in 9, anti-Th/To Abs in 9, anti-Ku Abs in 14 and anti-hUBF Abs in 4, whereas IIF identified anti-centromere in 35. Good agreement between the IP assays and the LB assay was found only for anti-Jo-1 and anti-centromere antibodies. When a cut-off was adjusted to reconcile with the results of IP assays, the detection performance of LB assay was improved for anti-EJ, anti-PL-7, anti-PL-12, anti-SRP, anti-topoisomerase I and anti-RNA polymerase III Abs. However, the results of anti-Mi-2, anti-U3 RNP, anti-Th/To, anti-hUBF and anti-Ku Abs remained discordant between the LB assay and IP assays at all cut-off levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Detection of myositis- or SSc-related autoAbs using a commercial LB assay requires great caution since it can yield analytically false-positive or false-negative results. Key Points • A line blot (LB) assay is a multi-analyte platform capable of simultaneously detecting multiple antibodies with anti-nuclear specificities. • Detection of myositis- or systemic sclerosis-related autoantibodies using a commercial LB assay requires great caution since it can yield analytically false-positive or false-negative results.

Frequencies and clinical associations of myositis-related antibodies in The Netherlands: A one-year survey of all Dutch patients

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) are a heterogeneous group of connective tissue diseases, collectively known as myositis. Diagnosis of IIM is challenging while timely recognition of an IIM is of utter importance considering treatment options and otherwise irreversible (severe) long-term clinical complications. With the EULAR/ACR classification criteria (2017) considerable advancement has been made in the diagnostic workup of IIM. While these criteria take into account clinical parameters as well as presence of one autoantibody, anti-Jo-1, several autoantibodies are associated with IIM and are currently evaluated to be incorporated into classification criteria. As individual antibodies occur at low frequency, the development of line blots allowing multiplex antibody analysis has improved laboratory diagnostics for IIM. The Euroline myositis line-blot assay (Euroimmun) allows screening and semi-quantitative measurement for 15 autoantibodies, i.e. myositis specific antibodies (MSA) to SRP, EJ, OJ, Mi-2α, Mi-2β, TIF1-γ, MDA5, NXP2, SAE1, PL-12, PL-7, Jo-1 and myositis associated antibodies (MAA) to Ku, PM/Scl-75 and PM/Scl-100. To evaluate the clinical significance of detection and levels of these autoantibodies in the Netherlands, a retrospective analysis of all Dutch requests for extended myositis screening within a 1 year period was performed. A total of 187 IIM patients and 632 non-IIM patients were included. We conclude that frequencies of MSA and MAA observed in IIM patients in a routine diagnostic setting are comparable to cohort-based studies. Weak positive antibody levels show less diagnostic accuracy compared to positive antibody levels, except for anti-NXP2. Known associations between antibodies and skin involvement (anti-MDA5, anti-TIF1-γ), lung involvement (anti-Jo-1), and malignancy (anti-TIF1-γ) were confirmed in our IIM study population. The availability of multiplex antibody analyses will facilitate inclusion of additional autoantibodies in clinical myositis guidelines and help to accelerate diagnosing IMM with rare but specific antibodies.

Autoantibodies in myositis

The discovery of novel autoantigen systems related to idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (collectively referred to as myositis) in adults and children has had major implications for the diagnosis and management of this group of diseases across a wide range of medical specialties. Traditionally, autoantibodies found in patients with myositis are described as being myositis-specific autoantibodies (MSAs) or myositis-associated autoantibodies (MAAs), depending on their prevalence in other, related conditions. However, certain MSAs are more closely associated with extramuscular manifestations, such as skin and lung disease, than with myositis itself. It is very rare for more than one MSA to coexist in the same individual, underpinning the potential to use MSAs to precisely define genetic and disease endotypes. Each MSA is associated with a distinctive pattern of disease or phenotype, which has implications for diagnosis and a more personalized approach to therapy. Knowledge of the function and localization of the autoantigenic targets for MSAs has provided key insights into the potential immunopathogenic mechanisms of myositis. In particular, evidence suggests that the alteration of expression of a myositis-related autoantigen by certain environmental influences or oncogenesis could be a pivotal event linking autoantibody generation to the development of disease.

Autoantibodies in interstitial lung diseases

The role of autoantibody testing for patients with interstitial lung disease is an evolving area. Recent guidelines recommend routine anti-nuclear antibodies, rheumatoid factor, and anti-citrullinated cyclic peptide antibody testing for patients undergoing diagnostic evaluation for interstitial lung disease, with further autoantibody testing reserved for selected cases guided by rheumatological features. Even this approach may miss patients with clinically significant autoantibodies when interstitial lung disease is the dominant or first manifestation of autoimmune disease. We retrospectively performed autoimmune serology in a clinically well characterised cohort of interstitial lung disease patients. Using stored serum, additional testing was performed to ensure all patients had complete autoantibody profiles including anti-nuclear antibodies, extractable nuclear antigen antibodies, double-stranded DNA antibodies, rheumatoid factor, anti-citrullinated cyclic peptide antibodies, anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies, and myositis antibodies. Eighty patients with interstitial lung disease, and available stored serum, were assessed. Mean age at interstitial lung disease diagnosis was 65.2 years and 42 patients were male. Positive autoimmune serology was found in 56 of 80 (70.0%) patients; the most common positive result was anti-nuclear antibodies (n=34; 42.5%). Myositis antibodies were detected in 13 of 80 (16.2%) patients. Four (5%) patients had elevated anti-citrullinated cyclic peptide antibodies, and two (2.5%) patients had detectable myeloperoxidase antibodies. Eleven (13.7%) patients with negative anti-nuclear antibodies had other significant disease associated autoantibodies. An extended panel of autoantibody testing may detect cases of connective tissue disease associated interstitial lung disease, regardless of clinical or radiological subtype, and prior to extra-pulmonary manifestations of systemic autoimmunity.

Immune-mediated necrotising myopathy: A critical review of current concepts

Immune-mediated necrotising myopathy (IMNM) is a relatively recently described form of idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM) that is characterised by progressive proximal weakness and few extra-muscular manifestations. Prominent myonecrosis, muscle fibre regeneration and a relative paucity of intramuscular lymphocytes are seen histologically. Immunological mechanisms are believed to underpin the pathogenesis, and intense immunotherapy is frequently required. Disease is often severe and neuromuscular recovery may be poor. Recently there has been an impressive international research effort to understand and characterise this emerging condition, although much remains unknown. Significant advances in the field include the discovery of specific autoantibodies, increased understanding of the risk factors, clinical characteristics and treatment options owing to a wealth of observational studies, and the development of novel classification criteria. Herein we review the current evidence regarding the pathophysiology, clinical presentation, histological features and serological profiles associated with this condition. Diagnostic approaches are discussed, including the role of muscle MRI and antibodies targeting 3‑hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase (HMGCR) and signal-recognition peptide (SRP), and a review of current treatment recommendations is provided.

Autoantibodies in juvenile-onset myositis: Their diagnostic value and associated clinical phenotype in a large UK cohort

OBJECTIVES

Juvenile myositis is a rare and heterogeneous disease. Diagnosis is often difficult but early treatment is important in reducing the risk of associated morbidity and poor outcomes. Myositis specific autoantibodies have been described in both juvenile and adult patients with myositis and can be helpful in dividing patients into clinically homogenous groups. We aimed to explore the utility of myositis specific autoantibodies as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in patients with juvenile-onset disease.

METHODS

Using radio-labelled immunoprecipitation and previously validated ELISAs we examined the presence of myositis specific autoantibodies in 380 patients with juvenile-onset myositis in addition to, 318 patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, 21 patients with juvenile-onset SLE, 27 patients with muscular dystrophies, and 48 healthy children.

RESULTS

An autoantibody was identified in 60% of juvenile-onset myositis patients. Myositis specific autoantibodies (49% patients) were exclusively found in patients with myositis and with the exception of one case were mutually exclusive and not found in conjunction with another autoantibody. Autoantibody subtypes were associated with age at disease onset, key clinical disease features and treatment received.

CONCLUSIONS

In juvenile patients the identification of a myositis specific autoantibody is highly suggestive of myositis. Autoantibodies can be identified in the majority of affected children and provide useful prognostic information. There is evidence of a differential treatment approach and patients with anti-TIF1γ autoantibodies are significantly more likely to receive aggressive treatment with IV cyclophosphamide and/or biologic drugs, clear trends are also visible in other autoantibody subgroups.