Cargando…

Automated evaluation of ANA under real-life conditions

INTRODUCTION: Visual evaluation of indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) on human epithelial-2 cells is the routine method for screening for antinuclear antibodies (ANA) in connective tissue diseases. Since visual IIF is time-consuming and subjective, automated IIF processors have been developed to offe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Loock, Clemens Dario, Egerer, Karl, Feist, Eugen, Burmester, Gerd-Rüdiger
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5566624/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28848653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2016-000409
_version_ 1783258582658056192
author Loock, Clemens Dario
Egerer, Karl
Feist, Eugen
Burmester, Gerd-Rüdiger
author_facet Loock, Clemens Dario
Egerer, Karl
Feist, Eugen
Burmester, Gerd-Rüdiger
author_sort Loock, Clemens Dario
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Visual evaluation of indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) on human epithelial-2 cells is the routine method for screening for antinuclear antibodies (ANA) in connective tissue diseases. Since visual IIF is time-consuming and subjective, automated IIF processors have been developed to offer standardised, valid and cost-efficient IIF assays. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic reliability of 2 widely used IIF processors (Aklides, Medipan GmbH and Helios, Aesku Diagnostics) under real-life laboratory working conditions. METHODS: ANA were determined in samples from patients with suspected autoimmune rheumatic disease (n=1008) using both automated IIF processors and compared with the results obtained by visual interpretation. The performance of IIF processors to discriminate positive from negative samples, pattern recognition and end point titre prediction were evaluated. RESULTS: The IIF processors showed moderate agreement with visual interpretation in discriminating positive from negative ANA samples (κ values: Aklides 0.494; Helios 0.415). The sensitivity/specificity was 89%/59% for Aklides and 87%/54% for Helios. However, both processors correctly identified 99% of definitely positive samples (titre ≥1:320). Aklides correctly identified 43% of fluorescence patterns and its light intensity values showed good correlation (Spearman's ρ=0.680) with visually obtained titres. CONCLUSIONS: Automated IIF determination under real-life laboratory working conditions remains a challenge. Owing to their high sensitivity at clinically relevant ANA titres, automated IIF processors can already support but not totally replace visual IIF.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5566624
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55666242017-08-28 Automated evaluation of ANA under real-life conditions Loock, Clemens Dario Egerer, Karl Feist, Eugen Burmester, Gerd-Rüdiger RMD Open Autoimmunity INTRODUCTION: Visual evaluation of indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) on human epithelial-2 cells is the routine method for screening for antinuclear antibodies (ANA) in connective tissue diseases. Since visual IIF is time-consuming and subjective, automated IIF processors have been developed to offer standardised, valid and cost-efficient IIF assays. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic reliability of 2 widely used IIF processors (Aklides, Medipan GmbH and Helios, Aesku Diagnostics) under real-life laboratory working conditions. METHODS: ANA were determined in samples from patients with suspected autoimmune rheumatic disease (n=1008) using both automated IIF processors and compared with the results obtained by visual interpretation. The performance of IIF processors to discriminate positive from negative samples, pattern recognition and end point titre prediction were evaluated. RESULTS: The IIF processors showed moderate agreement with visual interpretation in discriminating positive from negative ANA samples (κ values: Aklides 0.494; Helios 0.415). The sensitivity/specificity was 89%/59% for Aklides and 87%/54% for Helios. However, both processors correctly identified 99% of definitely positive samples (titre ≥1:320). Aklides correctly identified 43% of fluorescence patterns and its light intensity values showed good correlation (Spearman's ρ=0.680) with visually obtained titres. CONCLUSIONS: Automated IIF determination under real-life laboratory working conditions remains a challenge. Owing to their high sensitivity at clinically relevant ANA titres, automated IIF processors can already support but not totally replace visual IIF. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-04-24 /pmc/articles/PMC5566624/ /pubmed/28848653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2016-000409 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Autoimmunity
Loock, Clemens Dario
Egerer, Karl
Feist, Eugen
Burmester, Gerd-Rüdiger
Automated evaluation of ANA under real-life conditions
title Automated evaluation of ANA under real-life conditions
title_full Automated evaluation of ANA under real-life conditions
title_fullStr Automated evaluation of ANA under real-life conditions
title_full_unstemmed Automated evaluation of ANA under real-life conditions
title_short Automated evaluation of ANA under real-life conditions
title_sort automated evaluation of ana under real-life conditions
topic Autoimmunity
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5566624/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28848653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2016-000409
work_keys_str_mv AT loockclemensdario automatedevaluationofanaunderreallifeconditions
AT egererkarl automatedevaluationofanaunderreallifeconditions
AT feisteugen automatedevaluationofanaunderreallifeconditions
AT burmestergerdrudiger automatedevaluationofanaunderreallifeconditions