Staining of antinuclear antibodies and antibodies against removable nuclear antigens in connective tissue diseases

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-25
Author(s):  
José Enrique Oliva Menacho ◽  
Jorge Luis Arroyo-Acevedo ◽  
José Arturo Oliva-Candela ◽  
Marco Antonio García-Hjarles ◽  
Lester Domínguez-Huarcaya
2002 ◽  
Vol 48 (12) ◽  
pp. 2171-2176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilse EA Hoffman ◽  
Isabelle Peene ◽  
Eric M Veys ◽  
Filip De Keyser

Abstract Background: For detection of anti-nuclear antibodies (ANAs) and antibodies to extractable nuclear antigens (ENAs), samples frequently are screened with indirect immunofluorescence (IIF); further determination of anti-ENA antibodies is performed only when the result is positive. However, because anti-ENA reactivities are found in samples with low fluorescence intensities, we determined anti-ENA antibodies in samples with negative IIF and thus calculated the sensitivity of IIF for specific ANAs. Methods: We collected 494 samples consecutively referred by rheumatologists for routine ANA testing. IIF on HEp-2 and HEp-2000 (HEp-2 cells transfected with Ro60 cDNA) and line immunoassay (LIA) for the detection of specific ANAs were performed on all samples. Results: Fluorescence intensities and patterns on HEp-2 were strongly correlated with those on HEp-2000 [Spearman ρ = 0.852 (P <0.001) and 0.838 (P <0.001), respectively]. Sixty-eight of 494 samples were positive on LIA, of which only 72% (confidence interval, 68–76%) were detected with HEp-2 and 75% (confidence interval, 70–78%) with HEp-2000. Of 291 samples negative on both substrates, 12 were positive on LIA. Connective tissue diseases were diagnosed in four of these patients and suspected in at least three others. Conclusion: The HEp-2 and HEp-2000 substrates perform comparably for fluorescence intensities and patterns and for detecting specific ANAs, but some patients with negative IIF show reactivity on LIA. We recommend testing for fine reactivities, regardless of the IIF result, when the clinical suspicion for rheumatic connective tissue disease is high.


1981 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 144-145
Author(s):  
SOHRAB DAHI ◽  
GEORGE NAXAKIS ◽  
CHRISTINE M. WALLIS ◽  
ALEXANDER J. MacGILLIVRAY

2001 ◽  
Vol 47 (9) ◽  
pp. 1649-1659 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nobuhide Hayashi ◽  
Tomoko Kawamoto ◽  
Masahiko Mukai ◽  
Akio Morinobu ◽  
Masahiro Koshiba ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: A new enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for automated detection of antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) uses a mixture of HEp-2 cell extracts and multiple recombinant nuclear antigens immobilized on beads. We compared this EIA and an immunofluorescence (IF) assay in a large group of patients and controls. Methods: We studied 492 healthy individuals and 307 patients with connective tissue diseases (CTDs). Sera were tested by an automated EIA (COBAS® Core HEp2 ANA EIA; Roche Diagnostics) and IF. Samples were also tested for eight disease-specific antibodies, including antibodies against U1RNP, Sm, SSA/Ro, SSB/La, Scl-70, Jo-1, dsDNA, and centromere. Results: Areas under ROC curves for the EIA were greater than (P = 0.008–0.012) or numerically identical to areas for the IF method for each of six CTDs studied. ROC areas for EIA were 0.98 (95% confidence interval, 0.95–0.99), 0.99 (0.96–1.00), and 0.99 (0.98–1.00) in systemic lupus erythematosus (n = 111), systemic sclerosis (n = 39), and mixed connective tissue disease (n = 33), respectively. For all 258 CTD patients with conditions other than rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the sensitivity and specificity of the IF method at a cutoff dilution of 1:40 were 92% and 65%, respectively, vs 93% and 79% for the EIA at a cutoff of 0.6. For the IF method at a cutoff dilution of 1:160, sensitivity and specificity were 81% and 87%, respectively, vs 84% and 94%, respectively, for the EIA at a cutoff of 0.9. For 207 sera containing at least one of eight disease-specific ANAs, positivities for the EIA and the IF method were 97.1% and 97.6%, respectively, at cutoffs of 0.6 and 1:40 (P = 0.76). Conclusions: An EIA that can be performed by a fully automated instrument distinguishes CTDs (except RA) from healthy individuals with both higher sensitivity and specificity than the IF method when the cutoff index was set at 0.9. Moreover, it can be used to exclude the presence of disease-specific ANAs by setting the cutoff index at 0.6 with almost the same efficacy as the IF method.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 150-155
Author(s):  
Raúl Menor Almagro ◽  
Juan Francisco Rodríguez Gutiérrez ◽  
María Auxiliadora Martín-Martínez ◽  
María José Rodríguez Valls ◽  
Concepción Aranda Valera ◽  
...  

1987 ◽  
Vol 16 (sup66) ◽  
pp. 35-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Bombardieri ◽  
R. Neri ◽  
G. Tartarelli ◽  
A. D'ascanio ◽  
L. Giovanelli

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document