Cargando…

Automated Processing and Evaluation of Anti-Nuclear Antibody Indirect Immunofluorescence Testing

Indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) is considered by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the international consensus on ANA patterns (ICAP) the gold standard for the screening of anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA). As conventional IIF is labor intensive, time-consuming, subjective, and poorly st...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ricchiuti, Vincent, Adams, Joseph, Hardy, Donna J., Katayev, Alexander, Fleming, James K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5946161/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29780386
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2018.00927
_version_ 1783322138898333696
author Ricchiuti, Vincent
Adams, Joseph
Hardy, Donna J.
Katayev, Alexander
Fleming, James K.
author_facet Ricchiuti, Vincent
Adams, Joseph
Hardy, Donna J.
Katayev, Alexander
Fleming, James K.
author_sort Ricchiuti, Vincent
collection PubMed
description Indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) is considered by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the international consensus on ANA patterns (ICAP) the gold standard for the screening of anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA). As conventional IIF is labor intensive, time-consuming, subjective, and poorly standardized, there have been ongoing efforts to improve the standardization of reagents and to develop automated platforms for assay incubation, microscopy, and evaluation. In this study, the workflow and performance characteristics of a fully automated ANA IIF system (Sprinter XL, EUROPattern Suite, IFA 40: HEp-20-10 cells) were compared to a manual approach using visual microscopy with a filter device for single-well titration and to technologist reading. The Sprinter/EUROPattern system enabled the processing of large daily workload cohorts in less than 8 h and the reduction of labor hands-on time by more than 4 h. Regarding the discrimination of positive from negative samples, the overall agreement of the EUROPattern software with technologist reading was higher (95.6%) than when compared to the current method (89.4%). Moreover, the software was consistent with technologist reading in 80.6–97.5% of patterns and 71.0–93.8% of titers. In conclusion, the Sprinter/EUROPattern system provides substantial labor savings and good concordance with technologist ANA IIF microscopy, thus increasing standardization, laboratory efficiency, and removing subjectivity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5946161
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59461612018-05-18 Automated Processing and Evaluation of Anti-Nuclear Antibody Indirect Immunofluorescence Testing Ricchiuti, Vincent Adams, Joseph Hardy, Donna J. Katayev, Alexander Fleming, James K. Front Immunol Immunology Indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) is considered by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the international consensus on ANA patterns (ICAP) the gold standard for the screening of anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA). As conventional IIF is labor intensive, time-consuming, subjective, and poorly standardized, there have been ongoing efforts to improve the standardization of reagents and to develop automated platforms for assay incubation, microscopy, and evaluation. In this study, the workflow and performance characteristics of a fully automated ANA IIF system (Sprinter XL, EUROPattern Suite, IFA 40: HEp-20-10 cells) were compared to a manual approach using visual microscopy with a filter device for single-well titration and to technologist reading. The Sprinter/EUROPattern system enabled the processing of large daily workload cohorts in less than 8 h and the reduction of labor hands-on time by more than 4 h. Regarding the discrimination of positive from negative samples, the overall agreement of the EUROPattern software with technologist reading was higher (95.6%) than when compared to the current method (89.4%). Moreover, the software was consistent with technologist reading in 80.6–97.5% of patterns and 71.0–93.8% of titers. In conclusion, the Sprinter/EUROPattern system provides substantial labor savings and good concordance with technologist ANA IIF microscopy, thus increasing standardization, laboratory efficiency, and removing subjectivity. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-05-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5946161/ /pubmed/29780386 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2018.00927 Text en Copyright © 2018 Ricchiuti, Adams, Hardy, Katayev and Fleming. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Immunology
Ricchiuti, Vincent
Adams, Joseph
Hardy, Donna J.
Katayev, Alexander
Fleming, James K.
Automated Processing and Evaluation of Anti-Nuclear Antibody Indirect Immunofluorescence Testing
title Automated Processing and Evaluation of Anti-Nuclear Antibody Indirect Immunofluorescence Testing
title_full Automated Processing and Evaluation of Anti-Nuclear Antibody Indirect Immunofluorescence Testing
title_fullStr Automated Processing and Evaluation of Anti-Nuclear Antibody Indirect Immunofluorescence Testing
title_full_unstemmed Automated Processing and Evaluation of Anti-Nuclear Antibody Indirect Immunofluorescence Testing
title_short Automated Processing and Evaluation of Anti-Nuclear Antibody Indirect Immunofluorescence Testing
title_sort automated processing and evaluation of anti-nuclear antibody indirect immunofluorescence testing
topic Immunology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5946161/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29780386
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2018.00927
work_keys_str_mv AT ricchiutivincent automatedprocessingandevaluationofantinuclearantibodyindirectimmunofluorescencetesting
AT adamsjoseph automatedprocessingandevaluationofantinuclearantibodyindirectimmunofluorescencetesting
AT hardydonnaj automatedprocessingandevaluationofantinuclearantibodyindirectimmunofluorescencetesting
AT katayevalexander automatedprocessingandevaluationofantinuclearantibodyindirectimmunofluorescencetesting
AT flemingjamesk automatedprocessingandevaluationofantinuclearantibodyindirectimmunofluorescencetesting