Cargando…

Optimal validation of accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases: a narrative review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In neuroimmune diseases, autoantibodies are not only used for diagnosis, but also as markers for assessing disease severity and treatment efficacy, and as variables in predicting the prognosis and in subgroup classification. Accuracy of an assay is a prerequisite for using...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Li, Hai-Feng
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10116426/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37090045
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-21-2384
_version_ 1785028420217864192
author Li, Hai-Feng
author_facet Li, Hai-Feng
author_sort Li, Hai-Feng
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In neuroimmune diseases, autoantibodies are not only used for diagnosis, but also as markers for assessing disease severity and treatment efficacy, and as variables in predicting the prognosis and in subgroup classification. Accuracy of an assay is a prerequisite for using antibodies in the diagnosis and management. The antibody positive subgroup is important in constellating phenotypes, while the antibody negative subgroup provides an opportunity for discovery of new antibodies. This review is to discuss the validation studies of diagnostic accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definitions of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases. METHODS: The literature discussing validation studies of diagnostic accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in autoimmune diseases was broadly searched and discussed. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: The designs of a validation study, principles in defining the disease spectrum and biases, interpretation of the testing result and specific considerations for validation studies in neuroimmune diseases (such as phenotypes and inclusion criteria, control group selection, dynamic changes of antibody composition and sampling time, relationship between duration and severity of disease and antibody status, and pre-test factor), and improvement of antibody test techniques, as well as definitions and algorithms in defining antibody positive/negative subgroups in clinical practice and researches, are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The successful implementation of validation studies of autoantibody assays in neuroimmune diseases depends on reasonable design, phenotypic profiles of included patients and potential inclusion bias, test result interpretation and the influence from inclusion criteria, control group selection, patient characteristics on specimen sampling and pre-test factors. Reasonable definitions on antibody positive/negative groups may be different in clinical practice and researches, and rigorous definitions are conducive to constellation of disease phenotype and the exploration of new antibodies within a disease entity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10116426
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher AME Publishing Company
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101164262023-04-21 Optimal validation of accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases: a narrative review Li, Hai-Feng Ann Transl Med Review Article BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In neuroimmune diseases, autoantibodies are not only used for diagnosis, but also as markers for assessing disease severity and treatment efficacy, and as variables in predicting the prognosis and in subgroup classification. Accuracy of an assay is a prerequisite for using antibodies in the diagnosis and management. The antibody positive subgroup is important in constellating phenotypes, while the antibody negative subgroup provides an opportunity for discovery of new antibodies. This review is to discuss the validation studies of diagnostic accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definitions of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases. METHODS: The literature discussing validation studies of diagnostic accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in autoimmune diseases was broadly searched and discussed. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: The designs of a validation study, principles in defining the disease spectrum and biases, interpretation of the testing result and specific considerations for validation studies in neuroimmune diseases (such as phenotypes and inclusion criteria, control group selection, dynamic changes of antibody composition and sampling time, relationship between duration and severity of disease and antibody status, and pre-test factor), and improvement of antibody test techniques, as well as definitions and algorithms in defining antibody positive/negative subgroups in clinical practice and researches, are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The successful implementation of validation studies of autoantibody assays in neuroimmune diseases depends on reasonable design, phenotypic profiles of included patients and potential inclusion bias, test result interpretation and the influence from inclusion criteria, control group selection, patient characteristics on specimen sampling and pre-test factors. Reasonable definitions on antibody positive/negative groups may be different in clinical practice and researches, and rigorous definitions are conducive to constellation of disease phenotype and the exploration of new antibodies within a disease entity. AME Publishing Company 2022-07-28 2023-04-15 /pmc/articles/PMC10116426/ /pubmed/37090045 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-21-2384 Text en 2023 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Review Article
Li, Hai-Feng
Optimal validation of accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases: a narrative review
title Optimal validation of accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases: a narrative review
title_full Optimal validation of accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases: a narrative review
title_fullStr Optimal validation of accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases: a narrative review
title_full_unstemmed Optimal validation of accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases: a narrative review
title_short Optimal validation of accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases: a narrative review
title_sort optimal validation of accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases: a narrative review
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10116426/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37090045
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-21-2384
work_keys_str_mv AT lihaifeng optimalvalidationofaccuracyinantibodyassaysandreasonabledefinitionofantibodypositivenegativesubgroupsinneuroimmunediseasesanarrativereview