Anti-DFS70 antibodies detected by immunoblot methods: A reliable tool to confirm the dense fine speckles ANA pattern.

BACKGROUND: Autoantibodies to the DFS70 (dense fine speckles 70) protein have been identified among the antinuclear antibodies (ANA) in patients with various disorders. However, the ANA test in indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) is not a reliable method to identify anti-DFS70 antibodies. We undertook this study to evaluate the diagnostic performance of two new immunoblot methods for the detection of anti-DFS70 antibodies and to investigate whether their different DFS70 antigen composition could affect diagnostic accuracy in detecting anti-DFS70 antibodies. METHODS: 62 samples showing a DFS70 staining pattern by IIF were tested by dot blot (Alphadia) and line blot (Euroimmun) methods. The dot blot method employs a truncated sequence of the DFS70 antigen (residues 349-435), while the line blot uses the full-length protein (aa 1-530). The 62 samples were previously assayed by a chemoluminescent (CLIA) method also using a truncated antigen (aa 349-435): 27 were CLIA positive and 35 were CLIA negative. 120 sera from subjects with infectious diseases were used as controls. RESULT: Both immunoblot methods were positive in the 27 IIF/CLIA positive samples; in addition, the Alphadia dot blot identified another seven DFS70 samples and the Euroimmun line blot was positive in five samples that were negative by CLIA. Among the 120 control samples, two false positives were recorded for the CLIA method, six for the Alphadia method and four for the Euroimmun method. Therefore, in this selected series of samples, sensitivity and specificity were 43.5% and 98.3% for the CLIA method, 54.8% and 95% for the dot blot and 51.6% and 96.6% for the line blot, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Because of great inconsistency in assessing the DFS70 pattern using the ANA-IIF test, specific assays should be used to confirm anti-DFS70 antibodies. The results of this study show that there is no difference in the overall diagnostic accuracy among methods that use the truncated or the full-length DFS70 antigenic sequence and that it is likely that antibodies directed against antigens other than DFS70 may be responsible for producing a DFS70-like ANA-IIF pattern.

Specific chemoluminescence and immunoasdorption tests for anti-DFS70 antibodies avoid false positive results by indirect immunofluorescence.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate two new diagnostic methods for the identification of anti-DFS70 antibodies in samples showing a DFS70-staining pattern by indirect immunofluorescence (IIF). METHODS: We studied 731 patients: 576 were collected consecutively among those that in the ANA test on HEp-2 cells had produced a DFS70 fluorescence pattern and 155 were a consecutive series of patients sent by referring physicians for routine ANA testing. As controls we studied 50 patients with autoimmune diseases and 120 patients with active infectious disease. All 731 sera were assayed for anti-DFS70 antibodies by a specific chemoluminescence assay (CLIA); 70 randomly selected IIF-positive sera and 35 samples from patients with autoimmune diseases were studied by inhibition tests using the HEp-2 Select method. RESULTS: Assays performed with the CLIA-DFS70 method were positive in 30.4% of the samples presenting a DFS70 pattern by IIF, in 1.3% of the routine ANA sera, in 1.6% of the infectious sera and in none of the 50 autoimmune controls. However, as the IIF-DFS70 positive group included 106 patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARD), 11 of which were DFS70 positive by CLIA, the prevalence of DFS70 antibodies in SARD was 7.5%. The ANA test performed after the use of HEp-2 Select showed an inhibition in 95.7% of the sera. No change in fluorescence intensity and pattern morphology between the native sera and the same sera tested with the solution containing the DFS70 antigen was observed in the 35 samples from patients with autoimmune diseases. CONCLUSIONS: To avoid misinterpretation of ANA pattern and consequent diagnostic errors, confirmation of the DFS70-IIF pattern by CLIA or other specific methods is mandatory before reporting the presence of anti-DFS70 antibodies. The HEp-2 Select test in most cases eliminates the interference by anti-DFS70 antibodies and avoids the possible reporting of false positive results.

Automated antinuclear immunofluorescence antibody screening: a comparative study of six computer-aided diagnostic systems.

BACKGROUND: Indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) plays an important role in immunological assays for detecting and measuring autoantibodies. However, the method is burdened by some unfavorable features: the need for expert morphologists, the subjectivity of interpretation, and a low degree of standardization and automation. Following the recent statement by the American College of Rheumatology that the IIF technique should be considered as the standard screening method for the detection of anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA), the biomedical industry has developed technological solutions which might significantly improve automation of the procedure, not only in the preparation of substrates and slides, but also in microscope reading. METHODS: We collected 104 ANA-positive sera from patients with a confirmed clinical diagnosis of autoimmune disease and 40 ANA-negative sera from healthy blood donors. One aliquot of each serum, without information about pattern and titer, was sent to six laboratories of our group, where the sera were tested with the IIF manual method provided by each of the six manufacturers of automatic systems. Assignment of result (pos/neg), of pattern and titer was made by consensus at a meeting attended by all members of the research team. Result was assigned if consensus for pos/neg was reached by at least four of six certifiers, while for the pattern and for the titer, the value observed with higher frequency (mode) was adopted. Seventeen ANA-positive sera and six ANA-negative sera were excluded. Therefore, the study with the following automatic instrumentation was conducted on 92 ANA-positive sera and on 34 ANA-negative sera: Aklides, EUROPattern, G-Sight (I-Sight-IFA), Helios, Image Navigator, and Nova View. Analytical imprecision was measured in five aliquots of the same serum, randomly added to the sample series. RESULTS: Overall sensitivity of the six automated systems was 96.7% and overall specificity was 89.2%. Most false negatives were recorded for cytoplasmic patterns, whereas among nuclear patterns those with a low level of fluorescence (i.e., multiple nuclear dots, midbody, nuclear rim) were sometimes missed. The intensity values of the light signal of various instruments showed a good correlation with the titer obtained by manual reading (Spearman's rho between 0.672 and 0.839; P<0.0001 for all the systems). Imprecision ranged from 1.99% to 25.2% and, for all the systems, it was lower than that obtained by the manual IIF test (39.1%). The accuracy of pattern recognition, which is for now restricted to the most typical patterns (homogeneous, speckled, nucleolar, centromere, multiple nuclear dots and cytoplasmic) was limited, ranging from 52% to 79%. CONCLUSIONS: This study, which is the first to compare the diagnostic accuracy of six systems for automated ANA-IIF reading on the same series of sera, showed that all systems are able to perform very well the task for which they were created. Indeed, cumulative automatic discrimination between positive and negative samples had 95% accuracy. All the manufacturers are actively continuing the development of new and more sophisticated software for a better definition in automatic recognition of patterns and light signal conversion in end-point titer. In the future, this may avert the need for serum dilution for titration, which will be a great advantage in economic terms and time-saving.

Overcoming a "probable" diagnosis in antimitochondrial antibody negative primary biliary cirrhosis: study of 100 sera and review of the literature.

Serum anti-mitochondrial antibodies (AMA) are the serological hallmark of primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC), yet up to 15% of PBC sera are AMA negative at routine indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) while being referred to as "probable" cases. The diagnostic role of PBC-specific antinuclear antibodies (ANA) remains to be determined. We will report herein data on the accuracy of new laboratory tools for AMA and PBC-specific ANA in a large series of PBC sera that were AMA-negative at IIF. We will also provide a discussion of the history and current status of AMA detection methods. We included IIF AMA-negative PBC sera (n=100) and sera from patients with other chronic liver diseases (n=104) that had been independently tested for IIF AMA and ANA; sera were blindly tested with an ELISA PBC screening test including two ANA (gp210, sp100) and a triple (pMIT3) AMA recombinant antigens. Among IIF AMA-negative sera, 43/100 (43%) manifested reactivity using the PBC screening test. The same test was positive for 6/104 (5.8%) control sera. IIF AMA-negative/PBC screen-positive sera reacted against pMIT3 (11/43), gp210 (8/43), Sp100 (17/43), both pMIT3 and gp210 (1/43), or both pMIT3 and Sp100 (6/43). Concordance rates between the ANA pattern on HEp-2 cells and specific Sp100 and gp210 ELISA results in AMA-negative subjects were 92% for nuclear dots and Sp100 and 99% for nuclear rim and gp210. Our data confirm the hypothesis that a substantial part of IIF AMA-negative (formerly coined "probable") PBC cases manifest disease-specific autoantibodies when tested using newly available tools and thus overcome the previously suggested diagnostic classification. As suggested by the recent literature, we are convinced that the proportion of AMA-negative PBC cases will be significantly minimized by the use of new laboratory methods and recombinant antigens.