Antinuclear antibody testing

Clinical approach to neuro-rheumatology

Recognizing the neurologic manifestations of systemic rheumatologic diseases and certain isolated autoimmune neurologic diseases poses challenges to the clinician. Using a systematic approach allows the clinician to diagnose these conditions more readily and to initiate treatment more rapidly. Specific neurological syndromes frequently associated with rheumatologic or specific autoimmune conditions can suggest the diagnosis. A targeted history and examination can identify neurological and systemic clues that help to identify an underlying rheumatologic condition. Judicious use of laboratory and radiographic studies can help confirm suspected diagnoses. This article will review some of the neurological syndromes typical of rheumatologic disease and outline an approach to evaluating for unknown rheumatologic disease in this context.

[Biomarkers for chronic inflammatory diseases]

Inflammatory disorders of childhood, such as juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are a challenge for laboratory diagnostics. Firstly, the classical inflammatory markers, such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) often inadequately reflect disease activity but on the other hand there are few specific biomarkers that can be helpful in managing these diseases. Acute phase proteins reflect the systemic inflammatory response insufficiently as their increase is only the indirect result of local inflammatory processes. Modern inflammation diagnostics aim to reflect these local processes and to allow precise monitoring of disease activity. Experimental biomarkers, such as S100 proteins can detect subclinical inflammatory activity. In addition, established laboratory parameters exist for JIA [antinuclear antibodies (ANA), rheumatoid factor (RF), antibodies against cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP)] and for chronic IBD (fecal calprotectin) that are useful in the treatment of these diseases.

Autoantibody Detection Using Multiplex Technologies

Measurement of multiple antibodies has been possible for years using labor-intensive methods such as counterimmunoelectrophoresis and radioimmunoprecipitation. Recently, simpler methods that are more practical for routine analysis, often described as multiplex technologies, have been introduced. One common technique, the line assay, uses nitrocellulose strips that are precoated at different locations with more than a dozen recombinant proteins or peptides. Detection of results may be performed visually or with scanning instrumentation. A second technique uses families of polystyrene beads that are dyed to establish a unique identity; each bead type is then coated with a specific affinity-purified or recombinant protein. Detection is performed by flow cytometry. There have been multiple descriptions of the use of these techniques for measuring antibodies associated with the antinuclear antibody screen. More recent reports describe applications to antibodies associated with hypothyroidism, ANCA, anti-phospholipid syndrome, and celiac disease. This review summarizes the work that has been performed to date and examines the potential benefits of multiplexing to both the laboratory and the physician.

Association between antinuclear antibody titers and connective tissue diseases in a Rheumatology Department

OBJECTIVE

To determine the dilution titles at antinuclear antibodies (ANA) by indirect immunofluorescence observed in cell substrate HEp-2 and its association with the diagnosis of systemic connective tissue disease in ANA test requested by a Rheumatology Unit.

METHOD

Samples of patients attended for the first time in the rheumatology unit, without prior ANA test, between January 2010 and December 2012 were selected. The dilution titers, immunofluorescence patterns and antigen specificity were recorded. In January 2015 the diagnosis of the patients were evaluated and classified in systemic disease connective tissue (systemic lupus erythematosus, Sjögren's syndrome, systemic sclerosis, undifferentiated connective, antiphospholipid syndrome, mixed connective tissue and inflammatory myophaty) or not systemic disease connective tissue.

RESULT

A total of 1282 ANA tests requested by the Rheumatology Unit in subjects without previous study, 293 were positive, predominance of women (81.9%). Patients with systemic connective tissue disease were recorded 105, and 188 without systemic connective tissue disease. For 1/640 dilutions the positive predictive value in the connective was 73.3% compared to 26.6% of non-connective, and for values ≥1/1,280 85% versus 15% respectively. When performing the multivariate analysis we observed a positive association between 1/320 dilution OR 3.069 (95% CI: 1.237-7.614; P=.016), 1/640 OR 12.570 (95% CI: 3.659-43.187; P=.000) and ≥1/1,280 OR 42.136 (95% CI: 8.604-206.345; P=.000).

CONCLUSION

These results show association titles dilution ≥1/320 in ANA's first test requested by a Rheumatology Unit with patients with systemic connective tissue disease. The VPP in these patients was higher than previous studies requested by other medical specialties. This may indicate the importance of application of the test in a targeted way.

Autoantibodies in breast cancer

In addition to their historical role, autoantibodies appear promising as biomarkers to facilitate diagnosis, improve patient outcome and decrease mortality in cancer. Autoantibodies may also be useful in the identification of subjects at risk for cancer, that is, those bearing premalignant changes. Numerous studies have demonstrated that cancer serum contains a variety of autoantibodies that react with autologous cellular antigens, that is, tumor-associated antigens. Interestingly, some of these antigens are involved in signal transduction, cell cycle regulation, cell proliferation, and apoptosis. As such, identification of these molecules has additional importance for development of novel anticancer drugs and vaccines. This review focuses on the use of autoantibodies in breast cancer, a major public health problem. We also address the need for additional research to validate this approach in cancer diagnostics and therapeutics in general.

Evaluation of an automated chemiluminescent immunoassay kit for antinuclear antibodies in autoimmune diseases

The identification of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) is an essential step in the diagnosis of different autoimmune diseases. The gold standard method for their detection is immunofluorescence assay. However, this is a subjective and laborious method, thus a need for simplified objective methods has aroused. In the current work, we evaluated such automated method, the LIAISON(®) (DiaSorin, Italy) for the detection of ANA. A total of 242 sera were analyzed including 67 from healthy subjects, 107 from primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) patients, 20 from scleroderma patients and 48 from patients with Sjögren's syndrome. All sera were analyzed using the automated chemiluminescent immunoassays, LIAISON(®) for the presence of ANA (kit No. 310300). Positive samples were further analyzed for the presence of antidouble-stranded DNA (dsDNA) and autoantibodies to 6 extractable nuclear antigens (ENA) of the LIAISON(®) (kits No. 310330 and 310331). Negative samples were further analyzed by Blueblot ANA assay (D-TEK, Belgium) or BlueDot Liver (D-TEK, Belgium) as appropriate. The LIAISON(®) specificity for ANA screening was 97%. ANA positivity was determined in 80% of all patients. The sensitivity was 95.5% in scleroderma, 83% in PBC and 72.9% in Sjogren's syndrome. ENA was positive in all ANA-positive scleroderma and Sjögren's sera and in 27% of ANA-positive PBC sera. Among scleroderma or Sjögren patients that were ANA negative, 4 samples were positive for anti-SSA and 2 for RNP-68 utilizing Blueblot assays. M2 protein was found in 1 out of the ANA-negative PBC patients. The LIAISON(®) ANA screen is specific and sensitive for the evaluation of ANA in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis, scleroderma and Sjögren's syndrome.

Serologic laboratory findings in malignancy

Autoantibodies are extremely promising diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers of cancer, and have the potential to promote early diagnosis and to make a large impact by improving patient outcome and decreasing mortality. Moreover, autoantibodies may be useful reagents in the identification of subjects at risk for cancer, bearing premalignant tissue changes. Great efforts are being made in many laboratories to validate diagnostic panels of autoantibodies with high sensitivity and specificity that could be useful in a clinical setting. It is likely that prospective studies of sufficiently large cohorts of patients and controls using high-throughput technology may allow the identification of biomarkers with diagnostic significance, and perhaps of discrete antigen phenotypes with clinical significance. The identification of TAAs may also be essential for the development of anticancer vaccines, because autoantibodies found in cancer sera target molecules involved in signal transduction, cell-cycle regulation, cell proliferation, and apoptosis, playing important roles in carcinogenesis. On this basis, molecular studies of antigenantibody systems in cancer promise to yield valuable information on the carcinogenic process. TAAs identified by serum antibodies in cancer sera can be natural immunogenic molecules, useful as targets for cancer immunotherapy. An important problem encountered in the practice of medicine is the identification of healthy individuals in the general population who unknowingly are at high risk of developing cancer. For the rheumatologist, a related problem is the identification of those patients with rheumatic diseases who are at high risk for developing a malignant process. These problems encountered in the fields of cancer and the rheumatic diseases can in the future be helped by new diagnostic instruments based on antibodies. The need for promoting the early diagnosis of cancer is a recognized major public health problem in need of significant research support for the validation of multiple promising but inconclusive studies, with the intention of producing diagnostic panels of autoantibodies in various types of cancers. Cancer developing in patients with rheumatic diseases is also an important problem requiring prospective longterm follow-up studies of patients with rheumatic diseases, particularly because some of the new biologic therapies seem to increase the cancer risk. It is possible that a panel of autoantibodies common to patients with cancer and the rheumatic diseases may prove to be of value in the identification of those patients with ADs at high risk for neoplasms.

Autoantibodies and liver disease: uses and abuses

Confirming whether a patient has autoimmune liver disease is challenging, given its varied presentation and complex definitions. In the continued absence of pathognomonic serum markers, diagnosis requires evaluation of laboratory investigations and, frequently, a liver biopsy - all of which need to be interpreted in the correct clinical context, with an emphasis on exclusion of viral infections, drug toxicity and metabolic disease. However, clear diagnosis is important for appropriate and timely therapy. Autoantibodies remain important tools for clinicians, and were the first proposed serological markers to aid in differentiating viral from chronic autoimmune hepatitis. Their presence is occasionally considered to be synonymous with autoimmune liver disease - a misinterpretation of their clinical significance. The present article summarizes the serum autoantibodies currently investigated in clinical and research practice, along with a description of their value in adult chronic liver diseases, with an emphasis on their appropriate use in the diagnosis and management of patients with autoimmune liver disease.

Prevalence of antinuclear antibodies in 3 groups of healthy individuals: blood donors, hospital personnel, and relatives of patients with autoimmune diseases

Antinuclear antibodies (ANA) are frequently found in healthy populations. To define the prevalence, pattern, and titer of ANA in different groups of the healthy Mexican population, we studied 304 individuals, classified into 3 groups: 104 blood donors, 100 hospital personnel working at The State General Hospital, which included doctors, laboratory technicians, and nurses; and 100 relatives of patient diagnosed either with systemic lupus erythematosus or rheumatoid arthritis, all of them apparently healthy at the time of study. We determined ANA using immunofluorescence microscopy performed on HEp-2 cells. Fluorescence was detected in 165 serum samples (54.3%). The most frequent pattern was the speckled (50.3%). The most frequent dilution was 1:40 (35.4%), followed by 1:80 (13.4%), 1:160 (3.2%), and 1:320 (1.3%).Regarding the results by study group, we found a trend toward higher ANA levels in group 2 (hospital personnel), compared with group 1 (blood donors) and group 3 (relatives of patients), a trend also reflected by the increasing frequency of serum titers of 1:80 and higher (P = 0.074). According to occupation, medical doctors showed a higher incidence of speckled pattern when compared with other occupations (P = 0.022). Medical doctors (n = 75) showed also higher titers of this particular pattern (P = 0.03). In group 3, relatives of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus showed the speckled pattern more frequently than relatives of patients with rheumatoid arthritis, in low titers (P = 0.017). We suggest that ANA tests showing speckled pattern should be at a 1:160 titer or higher to be considered positive; other patterns such as homogeneous, peripheral, or centromeric might be considered positive even at low titers (</=1:40) although this needs investigation.ANA should generally not be tested without clinical indication. Positive ANA finding in the absence of physical signs and symptoms has limited diagnostic utility and should always be interpreted by a rheumatologist, in the context of clinical symptoms and results of laboratory tests for specific autoantibodies. Populations such as doctors and relatives of patients with autoimmune disease tend to presents increased ANA titers.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Elisa Methods as an Alternative Screening Test to Indirect Immunofluorescence for the Detection of Antinuclear Antibodies. Evaluation of Five Commercial Kits

Detection of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) is a fundamental laboratory test for diagnosing systemic autoimmune diseases. Currently, the method of choice is indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) on a HEp-2 cell substrate. The goal of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of five commercially available enzyme immunoassay (EIA) kits for ANA detection and to verify the possibility of using them as an alternative to the IIF method. The study involved 1513 patients, 315 of whom were diagnosed with a systemic autoimmune disease and 1198 in whom an autoimmune disorder was excluded. For all sera, ANA detection was performed via IIF and with five different EIA kits. The results were evaluated in relation to clinical diagnosis and the presence of possible specific autoantibodies (anti-ENA or anti-dsDNA); lastly, they were compared with the results obtained using ANA-IIF as the method of reference. The positive rate of the ANA-IIF test in subjects with systemic autoimmune diseases was 92%, whereas in the five ANA-EIA kits there was broad diversity in terms of response, with positive rates ranging from 74 to 94%. All the EIA kits correctly detected the presence of antibodies (anti-dsDNA, anti-RNP, anti-Ro/SSA) responsible for homogeneous and speckled fluorescence pattern, but at the same time they showed substantial inaccuracy with the nucleolar pattern, with a mean sensitivity of approximately 50% in this case. Instead, there was a large kit-to-kit difference in terms of identification of anti-Scl70 and centromere patterns, for which sensitivities ranged between 45 and 91%, and between 49 and 100%, respectively. The results of the study demonstrate that the commercially available ANA-EIA kits show different levels of sensitivity and specificity. Some of them have a diagnostic accuracy that is comparable and, in some cases, even higher than the IIF method. Consequently, these could be used as an alternative screening test to IIE. However, others do not ensure acceptable results. Therefore, careful evaluation of the various kits on the market is advisable before including any of these methods in the clinical and diagnostic testing.

Applications of protein microarrays for biomarker discovery

The search for new biomarkers for diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutic monitoring of diseases continues in earnest despite dwindling success at finding novel reliable markers. Some of the current markers in clinical use do not provide optimal sensitivity and specificity, with the prostate cancer antigen (PSA) being one of many such examples. The emergence of proteomic techniques and systems approaches to study disease pathophysiology has rekindled the quest for new biomarkers. In particular the use of protein microarrays has surged as a powerful tool for large-scale testing of biological samples. Approximately half the reports on protein microarrays have been published in the last two years especially in the area of biomarker discovery. In this review, we will discuss the application of protein microarray technologies that offer unique opportunities to find novel biomarkers.

Phase 1 trial of AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel plus CPG 7909: an asexual blood-stage vaccine for Plasmodium falciparum malaria

Background

Apical Membrane Antigen 1 (AMA1), a polymorphic merozoite surface protein, is a leading blood-stage malaria vaccine candidate. This is the first reported use in humans of an investigational vaccine, AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel, with the novel adjuvant CPG 7909.

Methods

A phase 1 trial was conducted at the University of Rochester with 75 malaria-naive volunteers to assess the safety and immunogenicity of the AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel+CPG 7909 malaria vaccine. Participants were sequentially enrolled and randomized within dose escalating cohorts to receive three vaccinations on days 0, 28 and 56 of either 20 µg of AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel®+564 µg CPG 7909 (n = 15), 80 µg of AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel® (n = 30), or 80 µg of AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel+564 µg CPG 7909 (n = 30).

Results

Local and systemic adverse events were significantly more likely to be of higher severity with the addition of CPG 7909. Anti-AMA1 immunoglobulin G (IgG) were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and the immune sera of volunteers that received 20 µg or 80 µg of AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel+CPG 7909 had up to 14 fold significant increases in anti-AMA1 antibody concentration compared to 80 µg of AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel alone. The addition of CPG 7909 to the AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel vaccine in humans also elicited AMA1 specific immune IgG that significantly and dramatically increased the in vitro growth inhibition of homologous parasites to levels as high as 96% inhibition.

Conclusion/Significance

The safety profile of the AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel+CPG 7909 malaria vaccine is acceptable, given the significant increase in immunogenicity observed. Further clinical development is ongoing.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00344539

Laboratory network of excellence: enhancing patient safety and service effectiveness

Clinical laboratories have undergone major changes due to technological progress and economic pressure. While costs of laboratory testing continue to be the dominant issue within the healthcare service worldwide, quality, effectiveness and impact on outcomes are also emerging as critical value-added features. Five Italian laboratories are therefore promoting a network of excellence by investigating markers of effectiveness of laboratory services and sharing their experience of using them in clinical practice. In the present study we report preliminary data on indicators of quality in all phases of the so-called total testing process, the key to evaluating all phases of the total testing process, including the appropriateness of test requests and data interpretation. Initial findings in evaluating pre-analytical causes of specimen rejection in three different laboratories and the effects of introducing three laboratory clinical guidelines are reported. These data should stimulate debate in the scientific community and encourage more clinical laboratories to use the same indicators to improve clinical effectiveness and clinical outcomes within the healthcare service.

Clinical features of 39 patients with antibodies to extractable nuclear antigens despite negative antinuclear antibodies: evidence for autoimmunity including neurologic and connective tissue diseases

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) rarely presents with a negative antinuclear antibody (ANA). Although antibodies to extractable nuclear antigens (ENA) are sometimes ordered despite a negative ANA, it is unclear if this contributes to the diagnosis of SLE or other forms of connective tissue disease (CTD). We reviewed 39 patients with anti-ENA antibodies despite a negative ANA during a 1-year period to determine the presence of SLE or other CTD. Several patients had clinical features suggestive of CTD, including 1 with possible SLE. A number of patients had neurologic disorders, especially peripheral neuropathy. In this study, the finding of anti-ENA despite negative ANA was associated with neurologic disorders and CTD. This may represent test bias or false-positive anti-ENA assays or false-negative ANA assays, or may imply immune-related mechanisms not previously described.

Multiplexed AtheNA multi-lyte immunoassay for ANA screening in autoimmune diseases

BACKGROUND

Multiplexed assays using fluorescence microspheres is an exciting technology with multiple applications including the detection of antinuclear autoantibodies (ANA) and autoantibody profiles. It is a rapid, sensitive and automatic method for simultaneous quantitative detection of several autoantibodies. The aim of our study was to determinate ANA and other autoantibodies to the nine extractable nuclear antigens by the AtheNA Multi-Lyte ANA system and compare the results achieved by this method to the routinely used enzyme immunoassay.

METHODS

Four hundred eighteen serum samples were tested utililizing the multiplexed method: 96 healthy donors, 86 requested ANA specimens obtained from routine lab, and 236 samples from patients with known autoimmune diseases (43-scleroderma, 113-systemic lupus erythematosus, 38-Sjogren's syndrome, and 42 rheumatoid arthritis). The ANA and antibodies to nine different analytes (SS/A, SS/B, Sm, RNP, Jo-1, Scl-70, dsDNA, Centromere B and Histone) were tested.

RESULTS

ANA screening by AtheNA system revealed high concordance of 99 and 97.7% with the enzyme immunoassay test in samples obtained from healthy donors and ANA requested samples, respectively. Evaluation of autoimmune disease-related samples for ANA by AtheNA technology also confirmed a high rate of concordance of 92-97.7% and correlated with the enzyme immunoassay. Positive discrepant results were found for Scl-70 specificity in 12.7% of SLE specimens by AtheNA technology, while all tested sera were negative for this antibody by enzyme immunoassay. Negative discrepant results were observed by the AtheNA system for anti-dsDNA. The sera (15 randomly obtained samples from SLE patients) were positive for anti-dsDNA in 50% of samples in Farr assay and 55% in enzyme immunoassay, respectively.

CONCLUSION

We suggest that the AtheNA technology may be a useful diagnostic tool for ANA screening. Additional investigations are required to compare an analytic performance between AtheNA and routine methods in determination of the individual autoantibody profile.