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

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.

A Probing of the Issue of Detecting IgG, IgG4 and IgA Antibodies to Laminin 332 Epitopes in Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid: A Clinical-Laboratory Experience of a Single Central European University Dermatology Department

Purpose

Mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) is a very rare autoimmune bullous disease, affecting predominantly the mucosae and characterized by autoantibodies to the epithelial basement membrane components. Laminin 332 (Ln-332) is one of the most probable antigens with association with malignancy. The laboratory diagnosis of Ln-332-mediated autoimmunity is troublesome. The aim here was to comparatively examine IgG, IgG4, and IgA autoantibodies specific to α3, β3 or γ2 subunits of Ln-322 in MMP patients using the BIOCHIP mosaic-based indirect immunofluorescence technique (IIF).

Patients and Methods

Sera from 15 MMP patients were studied. BIOCHIP mosaic-based Ln-332 IIF, direct immunofluorescence, ELISA tests for anti-BP180/BP20 IgG antibodies and statistical analyses were performed.

Results

Of all the 15 sera examined for IgG4 antibodies, only 1 (6.67%) reacted with the α3 chain, 0 with the β3 chain, and 0 with the γ2 chain. No positive reactivity was seen with the IgG and IgA antibodies. BIOCHIP mosaic-based IIF with Ln-332 showed 100% sensitivity, 8% specificity, 21% positive predictive value, and 100% negative predictive value in relation to the diagnostic gold standard of DIF. The concomitant malignancies were revealed in three cases.

Conclusion

The detection of antibodies to Ln-332 chains is occasional in Polish MMP sufferers. Still, the evaluation of IgG4 antibodies in MMP can reduce the false-negative results.

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.

Conceptualization and validation of an innovative direct immunofluorescence technique utilizing fluorescein conjugate against IgG + IgG4 for routinely diagnosing autoimmune bullous dermatoses

Introduction

Autoimmune bullous diseases (ABDs) are potentially life-threatening mucocutaneous illnesses that require diagnosis with direct immunofluorescence (DIF). In this study we compared the diagnostic accuracy of traditional DIF (DIFt; separate immunoglobulin (Ig) G, IgG1, IgG4, IgA, IgM and C3 deposits detection) and modified DIF (DIFm; simultaneous IgG + IgG4 deposits detection instead of separate IgG and IgG4 deposits detection) in routine diagnostics of ABDs.

Material and methods

Eighteen patients with ABDs (7 with pemphigus dermatoses and 11 with subepithelial ABDs) were evaluated with DIFt and DIFm.

Results

The agreement of detectability of IgG immunoreactants was obtained in 16 ABD cases (88.89%), as positive results in both DIFt and DIFm were obtained in 13 cases and negative results in both DIFt and DIFm were obtained in 3 cases. One ABD case (Brunsting-Perry pemphigoid) (5.56%) was negative in DIFm with a positive DIFt result (IgG1 deposits). One ABD case (bullous pemphigoid) (5.56%) had only C3 deposits in DIFt with a positive DIFm reading (IgG + IgG4 deposits). A statistically significant relationship (p = 0.0186) between DIFm and DIFt results was revealed using Fisher’s exact test.

Conclusions

Both DIFt and DIFm are useful methods to detect deposition of IgG immunoreactants, but it seems that the innovative DIFm method slightly increases the detectability of IgG/IgG4 immunoreactants in relation to DIFt. The introduction of DIFm into routine laboratory diagnostics of ABDs seems to be justified, as it enables the abandonment of separate FITC conjugates for IgG and IgG4, which is important for cost-effectiveness.

Evaluation of a Bi-Analyte Immunoblot as a Useful Tool for Diagnosing Dermatitis Herpetiformis

Immune responses to tissue transglutaminase (tTG) and nonapeptides of gliadin (npG) are associated with dermatitis herpetiformis (DH), a gluten-related dermatosis. Recently, a bi-analyte immunoblot (b-aIB) was introduced to detect IgA antibodies in response to tTG and npG. We compared the utility of ELISA and b-aIB with tTG in serological diagnoses of DH and their agreement with direct immunofluorescence (DIF). In total, 55 sera (27 DIF-positive DH patients, 4 DIF-negative DH patients and 24 healthy controls) were examined. ELISA for anti-tTG IgA, b-aIB for anti-npG and anti-tTG IgA, and statistical analysis were performed. The b-aIB with tTG showed 78% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100% positive predictive value, and 82% negative predictive value in relation to ELISA. A better rate of agreement (Cohen’s kappa values) in IgA detection was observed in the pair tTG ELISA and b-aIB with npG (0.85) than in pairs tTG ELISA and b-aIB with tTG (0.78) or b-aIB with tTG and b-aIB with npG (0.78). No degree of agreement was found between serological tests and DIF. Both serological tests may be used to detect the anti-tTG IgA in DH patients. Still, DH diagnosing requires careful consideration of clinical data as well as results of tissue imaging (crucial DIF) and immunoserological techniques detecting DH-type features.

Current status and prospects for the diagnosis of pemphigus vulgaris

Introduction: Pemphigus vulgaris (PV) is an intraepidermal autoimmune bullous disease (AIBD) characterized by autoantibodies against desmosomal adhesion proteins, most commonly desmoglein (Dsg)3, leading to the suprabasal cleft formation and acantholysis.Areas covered: Direct immunofluorescence (DIF) and indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) studies display the intercellular deposition of IgG/C3 throughout the epidermis and presence of circulating autoantibodies respectively, as a net-like pattern. However, the target antigen remains unknown using immunofluorescence techniques. Thanks to the development of Dsg ELISA, using recombinant technology, circulating antibodies against Dsg1 and 3 could be detected sensitively. It is possible to differentiate PV from pemphigus foliaceus (PF) using this assay. BIOCHIP mosaic and multivariant ELISA are two novel serologic methods with the added value of the ability to screen several AIBDs simultaneously.Non-Dsg1/3 antigens are also involved in the pathogenesis of PV and investigated more deeply thanks to the protein microarrays technique. Additionally, patients with high values of anti-Dsg1/3 may be lesion-free, suggesting the presence of nonpathogenic autoantibodies.Expert opinion: Newer diagnostic methods to replace traditional techniques should possess high sensitivity and specificity and be widely available, noninvasive, and relatively cheap. The newly developed methods need to be further evaluated before being recommended for routine use.

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.

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.

A Comparative Analysis of CD32A and CD16A Polymorphisms in Relation to Autoimmune Responses in Pemphigus Diseases and Subepithelial Autoimmune Blistering Disorders

Autoimmune blistering dermatoses (ABDs) are characterized by autoantibodies to keratinocyte surface antigens and molecules within the dermal–epidermal junction causing disruption of skin integrity. The affinity of Fc receptors (FcRs) causing an autoimmune response in ABDs may vary based on single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in FcRs determining the course of disease. This study aimed to explore the effects of CD16A and CD32A SNPs on the autoimmune response in several ABDs. In total, 61 ABDs patients were investigated. ELISA tests, direct immunofluorescence (DIF), TaqMan SNP Genotyping Assays, and statistical analyses were performed. The CA genotype (composed of allele C and A) of rs396991 in CD16A had a higher affinity for tissue-bound IgG1 in pemphigus and for C3 in subepithelial ABDs, showing statistical significance. The greatest relative risk (odds ratio) was reported for AA (rs396991 of CD16A) and CC (rs1801274 of CD32A) homozygotes. There were no statistically significant differences between certain genotypes and specific circulating autoantibodies (anti-DSG1, anti-DSG3 IgG in pemphigus; anti-BP180, anti-BP230 IgG) in subepithelial ABDs. Our findings indicated that rs396991 in CD16A may be of greater importance in ABDs development. Moreover, FcR polymorphisms appeared to have a greater impact on tissue-bound antibodies detected using DIF than circulating serum antibodies in ABDs.

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.

Blue light-emitting diode technology-operated microscopy is preferable to both short arc mercury lamp-operated microscopy and laser scanning confocal microscopy for direct immunofluorescence images evaluation in routinely diagnosing subepidermal autoimmune blistering diseases

Direct immunofluorescence (DIF) microscopy still is the gold standard in diagnosing and differentiating subepidermal autoimmune blistering diseases (SABDs) from other bullous diseases. New optical systems were developed that aim to facilitate DIF images evaluation. The aim of the study was to evaluate the usefulness of three fluorescence microscopy systems with different light source for routine diagnostics of SABDs with DIF. In total, perilesional tissue samples for DIF from 34 SABD patients were examined under the three commercial microscopy systems (short arc mercury lamp-operated microscopy-MLM, blue light-emitting diode technology-operated microscopy-bLED and laser scanning confocal microscopy-LSCM) for the detection and pattern analysis of IgA, IgG, IgG1, IgG4, C3 immunoreactants along the dermal-epidermal junction (DEJ) by three independent observers simultaneously. MLM, bLED, and LSCM provided comparable quality of disease-characterizing immunoreactants imaging (number of immunoreactant types detected and patterns of their deposition along DEJ were the same) but screening of slides was quicker using bLED than both LSCM and MLM, as statistical analysis indicated. It is concluded that bLED is an efficient and preferable system for routinely diagnosing SABDs cost-effectively. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS: New optical systems were developed that aim to facilitate direct immunofluorescence evaluation. Here, we evaluate the usefulness of three fluorescence microscopy systems with different light source for routine diagnostics concluding that that bLED is an efficient and preferable system.

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.

New biochip immunofluorescence test for the serological diagnosis of pemphigus vulgaris and foliaceus: A review of the literature

The immunoassays that are available for the serological diagnosis of the more common subtypes of autoimmune blistering diseases such as pemphigus vulgaris (PV) and pemphigus foliaceus (PF) include enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) testing to specific antigens desmoglein (Dsg)1 and Dsg3, direct immunofluorescence (DIF), indirect immunofluorescence (IIF), and immunoblotting. A review of the literature on the biochip assay was conducted. Six studies investigated the validity of a new biochip, mosaic-based, IIF test in patients with pemphigus and demonstrated its relatively high sensitivity and specificity (Dsg3: 97.62-100%, 99.6-100%; Dsg1: 90%, 100%) in comparison with ELISA (Dsg3: 81-100%, 94-100%; Dsg1: 69-100%, 61.1-100%), and/or IIF (PV: 75-100%, 91.8-100%; PF: 67-100%) using suitable substrates. So far, validation studies of the biochip have been conducted in four countries (Germany, Italy, Turkey, and Poland) but none in the southern hemisphere. Caucasian patients were recruited as normal controls for these studies; thus, the diagnostic value of the biochip remains uncertain in population groups of other ethnicities. A range of disease control patients were recruited including patients with linear immunoglobulin A dermatosis, psoriasis, discoid lupus erythematosus, lichen planus, and noninflammatory skin diseases (e.g., squamous cell carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma, and vascular leg ulcers). Prospective studies with control patients from a diverse range of ethnicities are needed to better validate the biochip.

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.