Evaluation of a Multiplex ELISA for Autoantibody Profiling in Patients with Autoimmune Connective Tissue Diseases

• Published in: Autoimmune Diseases Vol. 2014; no. 2014; pp. 305 - 310
• Main Authors: Kumble, Sarita, Caro Pérez, Alejandro, Kumble, Krishnanand D., Alonso Cañizal, M. Consuelo, Jiménez Jiménez, Luis M., Alonso Díez, Lorena, Durán Parejo, Pilar
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cairo, Egypt Hindawi Limiteds 01-01-2014; Hindawi Puplishing Corporation; Hindawi Publishing Corporation; John Wiley & Sons, Inc; Hindawi Limited
• Subjects: Agreements; Antibodies; Antigens; Autoantibodies; Autoimmune diseases; Connective tissue diseases; Connective tissues; Development and progression; Diagnosis; Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; Genetic aspects; Identification and classification; Immunoassay; Immunology; Infectious diseases; Innovations; Proteins; Rheumatoid arthritis; Testing laboratories; Vasculitis
• ISSN: 2090-0430; 2090-0422; 2090-0430
• DOI: 10.1155/2014/896787

The performance of immunoassays for the detection of autoantibodies is of critical importance in the diagnosis and assessment of patients with autoimmune connective tissue diseases (ACTD). Our objective was to compare the features of two multiplexed assays—INNO-LIA ANA and Gennova-PictArray ENA ELISA—for measurement of multiple autoantibodies and their utility as a clinical tool in ACTD diagnosis. The antigens included SS-A/Ro (60 and 52), SSB/La, Sm, Sm/RNP, CENP-B, Jo-1, and Scl-70. Stored sera from 85 ACTD patients and 80 controls consisting of patients with vasculitis, rheumatoid arthritis and infectious diseases, as well as healthy subjects were analyzed jointly with clinical and laboratory data. Agreement between the two methods varied between 58 and 99% (Cohen’s kappa: 0.21–0.71) mostly for SSA and SSB. The frequency of specific autoantibodies measured using the two methods was more variable for SSA, SSB, and RNP/Sm. There were a higher number of ambiguous results when using INNO-LIA. The optimized cut-off values of the Gennova-PictArray resulted in over 99% specificities in samples obtained from the control group. Sensitivity patterns were more accurate in Gennova-PictArray than in INNO-LIA, as suggested in previously reported studies. A third method could be applied to determine which of the two methods is more accurate.