Autoimmun Rev. 2011 Jun 30. [Epub ahead of print]
Detection of antinuclear antibodies by indirect immunofluorescence and
by solid phase assay.
Op de Be=E9ck K, Vermeersch P, Verschueren P, Westhovens R, Mari=EBn G,
Blockmans D, Bossuyt X.
SourceExperimental Laboratory Immunology, Department of Medical
Diagnostic Sciences, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium.
Abstract
Testing for antinuclear antibodies is useful for the diagnosis of
systemic rheumatic diseases. Solid phase assays are increasingly
replacing indirect immunofluorescence for detection of antinuclear
antibodies. In the most recent generation of solid phase assays,
manufacturers attempt to improve the performance of the assays by
adding extra antigens. Solid phase assay (EliA CTD Screen, Phadia, in
which antibodies to 17 antigens are detected) was compared to indirect
immunofluorescence for the detection of antinuclear antibodies in
diagnostic samples of 236 patients with autoimmune connective tissue
diseases, in 149 healthy blood donors, 139 patients with chronic
fatigue syndrome, and 134 diseased controls. The sensitivity of EliA
CTD Screen for systemic lupus erythematosus, systemic sclerosis,
primary Sj=F6gren's syndrome, mixed connective tissue disease, and
inflammatory myopathy was 74%, 72%, 89%, 100%, and 39%, respectively.
The reactivity in blood donors, in patients with chronic fatigue
syndrome, and in diseased controls was <4%. At an immunofluorescence
cutoff that corresponded to the specificity found with solid phase
assays, the sensitivity of indirect immunofluorescence was lower than
the sensitivity of solid phase assays. Likelihood ratios increased
with increasing antibody concentrations. Generally, a positive test
result by EliA CTD Screen had a higher likelihood ratio for systemic
rheumatic disease than a positive test result by indirect
immunofluorescence. A negative test result by indirect
immunofluorescence, however, had a lower likelihood ratio than a
negative test result by EliA CTD Screen, indicating that the negative
predictive value was higher for indirect immunofluorescence than for
EliA CTD screen.
Copyright =A9 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
PMID:21741497[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
---------------------------------------------
Send posts to CO-CURE@listserv.nodak.edu
Unsubscribe at http://www.co-cure.org/unsub.htm
Co-Cure Archives: http://listserv.nodak.edu/archives/co-cure.html
---------------------------------------------
Co-Cure's purpose is to provide information from across the spectrum of
opinion concerning medical, research and political aspects of ME/CFS and/or
FMS. We take no position on the validity of any specific scientific or
political opinion expressed in Co-Cure posts, and we urge readers to
research the various opinions available before assuming any one
interpretation is definitive. The Co-Cure website <www.co-cure.org> has a
link to our complete archive of posts as well as articles of central
importance to the issues of our community.
---------------------------------------------
