AI Article Synopsis

  • Autoantibodies against extractable nuclear antigens (ENA) are essential for diagnosing systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARD), and new methods allow for simultaneous detection of multiple anti-ENA reactivities.
  • The study compared eight different immunoassays on sera from 60 SARD patients, 10 inflammatory arthritis patients, and 10 healthy donors to assess their sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy.
  • Results showed good agreement among methods (average kappa of 0.82) and high specificity, but there were notable differences in analytical sensitivity, highlighting the need for clinicians to understand the diagnostic capabilities of the assays used.

Article Abstract

Background: Autoantibodies against extractable nuclear antigens (ENA) play a pivotal role in the diagnosis and classification of systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARD). In recent years, newly developed methods have enabled the simultaneous and quantitative detection of multiple anti-ENA reactivities. However, data regarding the comparability of results obtained using different technologies across different platforms are scarce. In this study we compared eight different immunoassays, commonly used in current laboratory practice for detection of anti-ENA antibodies.

Methods: Sixty patients suffering from different SARD, 10 inflammatory arthritis patients (disease controls) and 10 healthy blood donors were included in this comparative study. Sera were collected in 15 centers belonging to the Study Group on Autoimmune Diseases of the Italian Society of Clinical Pathology and Laboratory Medicine. We evaluated the analytical sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of each method for antibodies to Sm, RNP, Ro60, Ro52, Scl70, CENP-B and Jo1. Cohen's kappa was used to analyze the agreement among methods.

Results: Average agreement among methods was 0.82, ranging from substantial (k = 0.72) to almost perfect (k = 0.92). However, while the specificity was very good for all methods, some differences emerged regarding the analytical sensitivity.

Conclusions: Diagnostic performance of current technologies for anti-ENA antibody detection showed good comparability. However, as some differences exist among methods, laboratory scientists and clinicians must be aware of the diagnostic accuracy of the testing method in use.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jim.2022.113297DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

current technologies
8
technologies anti-ena
8
anti-ena antibody
8
antibody detection
8
diagnostic accuracy
8
anti-ena
4
detection
4
detection state-of-the-art
4
diagnostic
4
state-of-the-art diagnostic
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!