Cargando…

Current state of technologies and recognition of anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies in China: A multi‐center study

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated that Ro60 and Ro52 have different clinical implications, and anti‐Ro52 antibodies are an independent serum marker of systemic autoimmune diseases, including Sjögren's syndrome. Many different assays have been adopted to detect anti‐Sjögren's s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Yu‐Lan, Hu, Chao‐Jun, Peng, Lin‐Yi, Wang, Chu‐Han, Zhao, Yan, Zhang, Wen, Liu, Dong‐Zhou
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8649342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34674312
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.24045
_version_ 1784610976718389248
author Chen, Yu‐Lan
Hu, Chao‐Jun
Peng, Lin‐Yi
Wang, Chu‐Han
Zhao, Yan
Zhang, Wen
Liu, Dong‐Zhou
author_facet Chen, Yu‐Lan
Hu, Chao‐Jun
Peng, Lin‐Yi
Wang, Chu‐Han
Zhao, Yan
Zhang, Wen
Liu, Dong‐Zhou
author_sort Chen, Yu‐Lan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated that Ro60 and Ro52 have different clinical implications, and anti‐Ro52 antibodies are an independent serum marker of systemic autoimmune diseases, including Sjögren's syndrome. Many different assays have been adopted to detect anti‐Sjögren's syndrome antigen A (SSA)/Ro antibodies, while to date no specific approach has been recommended as optimal for anti‐SSA/Ro antibody testing. Herein, we performed a multi‐center study to explore the current clinical utility of different strategies for anti‐SSA/Ro antibody testing in China. METHODS: Twenty‐one tertiary care centers were included in this questionnaire‐based study. The self‐administered questionnaire mainly includes testing methods for anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies, reporting system of results, and interpretation of results by clinicians. RESULTS: Six different methods were applied to detect anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies in the 21 centers. Line immunoassay (eight different commercial kits) was the most frequently adopted method (21/21, 100%), with different cutoff values and strategies for intensity stratification. There were two reporting systems: One was reported as “anti‐SSA antibodies” and “anti‐Ro52 antibodies” (12/21, 57%), while the other was “anti‐SSA/Ro60 antibodies” and “anti‐SSA/Ro52 antibodies” (9/21, 43%). Notably, six centers (29%) considered either positive anti‐Ro60 or anti‐Ro52 antibodies as positive anti‐SSA antibodies, all of which adopted the latter reporting system. CONCLUSION: Significant variabilities existed among anti‐SSA/Ro assays. Nearly 30% of centers misinterpreted the definition of positive anti‐SSA antibodies, which may be attributed to the confusing reporting systems of line immunoassay. Therefore, we advocate standardization of the nomenclature of anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies, changing the “anti‐SSA/Ro52” label in favor of the “anti‐Ro52” antibodies for a clear designation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8649342
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86493422021-12-28 Current state of technologies and recognition of anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies in China: A multi‐center study Chen, Yu‐Lan Hu, Chao‐Jun Peng, Lin‐Yi Wang, Chu‐Han Zhao, Yan Zhang, Wen Liu, Dong‐Zhou J Clin Lab Anal Research Articles BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated that Ro60 and Ro52 have different clinical implications, and anti‐Ro52 antibodies are an independent serum marker of systemic autoimmune diseases, including Sjögren's syndrome. Many different assays have been adopted to detect anti‐Sjögren's syndrome antigen A (SSA)/Ro antibodies, while to date no specific approach has been recommended as optimal for anti‐SSA/Ro antibody testing. Herein, we performed a multi‐center study to explore the current clinical utility of different strategies for anti‐SSA/Ro antibody testing in China. METHODS: Twenty‐one tertiary care centers were included in this questionnaire‐based study. The self‐administered questionnaire mainly includes testing methods for anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies, reporting system of results, and interpretation of results by clinicians. RESULTS: Six different methods were applied to detect anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies in the 21 centers. Line immunoassay (eight different commercial kits) was the most frequently adopted method (21/21, 100%), with different cutoff values and strategies for intensity stratification. There were two reporting systems: One was reported as “anti‐SSA antibodies” and “anti‐Ro52 antibodies” (12/21, 57%), while the other was “anti‐SSA/Ro60 antibodies” and “anti‐SSA/Ro52 antibodies” (9/21, 43%). Notably, six centers (29%) considered either positive anti‐Ro60 or anti‐Ro52 antibodies as positive anti‐SSA antibodies, all of which adopted the latter reporting system. CONCLUSION: Significant variabilities existed among anti‐SSA/Ro assays. Nearly 30% of centers misinterpreted the definition of positive anti‐SSA antibodies, which may be attributed to the confusing reporting systems of line immunoassay. Therefore, we advocate standardization of the nomenclature of anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies, changing the “anti‐SSA/Ro52” label in favor of the “anti‐Ro52” antibodies for a clear designation. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-10-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8649342/ /pubmed/34674312 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.24045 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Chen, Yu‐Lan
Hu, Chao‐Jun
Peng, Lin‐Yi
Wang, Chu‐Han
Zhao, Yan
Zhang, Wen
Liu, Dong‐Zhou
Current state of technologies and recognition of anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies in China: A multi‐center study
title Current state of technologies and recognition of anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies in China: A multi‐center study
title_full Current state of technologies and recognition of anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies in China: A multi‐center study
title_fullStr Current state of technologies and recognition of anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies in China: A multi‐center study
title_full_unstemmed Current state of technologies and recognition of anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies in China: A multi‐center study
title_short Current state of technologies and recognition of anti‐SSA/Ro antibodies in China: A multi‐center study
title_sort current state of technologies and recognition of anti‐ssa/ro antibodies in china: a multi‐center study
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8649342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34674312
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.24045
work_keys_str_mv AT chenyulan currentstateoftechnologiesandrecognitionofantissaroantibodiesinchinaamulticenterstudy
AT huchaojun currentstateoftechnologiesandrecognitionofantissaroantibodiesinchinaamulticenterstudy
AT penglinyi currentstateoftechnologiesandrecognitionofantissaroantibodiesinchinaamulticenterstudy
AT wangchuhan currentstateoftechnologiesandrecognitionofantissaroantibodiesinchinaamulticenterstudy
AT zhaoyan currentstateoftechnologiesandrecognitionofantissaroantibodiesinchinaamulticenterstudy
AT zhangwen currentstateoftechnologiesandrecognitionofantissaroantibodiesinchinaamulticenterstudy
AT liudongzhou currentstateoftechnologiesandrecognitionofantissaroantibodiesinchinaamulticenterstudy
AT currentstateoftechnologiesandrecognitionofantissaroantibodiesinchinaamulticenterstudy