Comparison of different ANCA detection methods in a predominantly MPO-ANCA-associated vasculitis cohort.

IF 2.7 Q3 IMMUNOLOGY Immunological Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-11 DOI:10.1080/25785826.2024.2408054
Yasuhiro Katsumata, Ken-Ei Sada, Tomohiro Kameda, Hiroaki Dobashi, Shinya Kaname, Naotake Tsuboi, Yoshinori Matsumoto, Koichi Amano, Naoto Tamura, Masayoshi Harigai
{"title":"Comparison of different ANCA detection methods in a predominantly MPO-ANCA-associated vasculitis cohort.","authors":"Yasuhiro Katsumata, Ken-Ei Sada, Tomohiro Kameda, Hiroaki Dobashi, Shinya Kaname, Naotake Tsuboi, Yoshinori Matsumoto, Koichi Amano, Naoto Tamura, Masayoshi Harigai","doi":"10.1080/25785826.2024.2408054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We compared different antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA) detection methods using a predominantly myeloperoxidase (MPO)-ANCA-associated vasculitis cohort. Stored sera from 147 patients with untreated ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV), including microscopic polyangiitis and granulomatosis with polyangiitis (<i>n</i> = 115 and 32, respectively), and 124 disease controls were tested for P-ANCA and C-ANCA with immunofluorescence (IIF), and for MPO-ANCA and proteinase 3 (PR3)-ANCA with different antigen-specific immunoassays: direct enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA), third-generation fluorescent enzyme immunoassay (FEIA), and latex turbidimetrical immunoassay (LTIA). In addition, MPO-ANCA and PR3-ANCA titers were calibrated using certified reference materials (CRMs). The sensitivities and specificities for AAV diagnoses were 95% and 94% (IIF), 86% and 98% (ELISA), 93% and 94% (CLEIA), 92% and 96% (FEIA), and 68% and 88% (LTIA). Dual IIF/antigen-specific immunoassay testing reduced diagnostic accuracies from 94% to 93%. The quantitative agreement between ANCA levels measured using CLEIA and FEIA and calibrated using CRMs was not good. In conclusion, this study demonstrated the high performance of antigen-specific immunoassays for AAV diagnosis in a predominantly MPO-ANCA-associated vasculitis cohort and suggested that the benefit of dual IIF/antigen-specific immunoassay testing is limited. Standardizing ANCA measurements using different immunoassays was difficult, even when using CRMs.</p>","PeriodicalId":37286,"journal":{"name":"Immunological Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Immunological Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/25785826.2024.2408054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We compared different antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA) detection methods using a predominantly myeloperoxidase (MPO)-ANCA-associated vasculitis cohort. Stored sera from 147 patients with untreated ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV), including microscopic polyangiitis and granulomatosis with polyangiitis (n = 115 and 32, respectively), and 124 disease controls were tested for P-ANCA and C-ANCA with immunofluorescence (IIF), and for MPO-ANCA and proteinase 3 (PR3)-ANCA with different antigen-specific immunoassays: direct enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA), third-generation fluorescent enzyme immunoassay (FEIA), and latex turbidimetrical immunoassay (LTIA). In addition, MPO-ANCA and PR3-ANCA titers were calibrated using certified reference materials (CRMs). The sensitivities and specificities for AAV diagnoses were 95% and 94% (IIF), 86% and 98% (ELISA), 93% and 94% (CLEIA), 92% and 96% (FEIA), and 68% and 88% (LTIA). Dual IIF/antigen-specific immunoassay testing reduced diagnostic accuracies from 94% to 93%. The quantitative agreement between ANCA levels measured using CLEIA and FEIA and calibrated using CRMs was not good. In conclusion, this study demonstrated the high performance of antigen-specific immunoassays for AAV diagnosis in a predominantly MPO-ANCA-associated vasculitis cohort and suggested that the benefit of dual IIF/antigen-specific immunoassay testing is limited. Standardizing ANCA measurements using different immunoassays was difficult, even when using CRMs.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在以 MPO-ANCA 相关性血管炎为主的队列中比较不同的 ANCA 检测方法。
我们使用主要是髓过氧化物酶(MPO)-ANCA 相关性血管炎队列比较了不同的抗中性粒细胞胞浆抗体(ANCA)检测方法。对 147 名未经治疗的 ANCA 相关性血管炎(AAV)(包括显微镜下多血管炎和肉芽肿性多血管炎)患者(分别为 115 人和 32 人)和 124 名疾病对照者储存的血清进行了免疫荧光 (IIF) 检测 P-ANCA 和 C-ANCA,并用不同的抗原特异性免疫测定法检测 MPO-ANCA 和蛋白酶 3 (PR3)-ANCA:直接酶联免疫吸附分析法(ELISA)、化学发光酶免疫分析法(CLEIA)、第三代荧光酶免疫分析法(FEIA)和乳胶浊度免疫分析法(LTIA)。此外,MPO-ANCA 和 PR3-ANCA 滴度还使用有证标准物质(CRMs)进行了校准。诊断 AAV 的灵敏度和特异性分别为 95% 和 94%(IIF)、86% 和 98%(ELISA)、93% 和 94%(CLEIA)、92% 和 96%(FEIA)以及 68% 和 88%(LTIA)。双重 IIF/抗原特异性免疫测定检测将诊断准确率从 94% 降至 93%。使用 CLEIA 和 FEIA 测量的 ANCA 水平与使用 CRMs 校准的 ANCA 水平之间的定量一致性不佳。总之,本研究证明了抗原特异性免疫测定在主要由 MPO-ANCA 相关的血管炎队列中诊断 AAV 的高性能,并提示 IIF/抗原特异性免疫测定双重检测的益处有限。使用不同的免疫测定方法进行 ANCA 测量很难标准化,即使使用 CRM 也是如此。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Immunological Medicine
Immunological Medicine Medicine-Immunology and Allergy
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
2.30%
发文量
19
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊最新文献
Increased response to granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor in peripheral blood cells and transient manifestations mimicking juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia in a male patient with NEMO deficiency caused by a deep intronic pathogenic variant of IKBKG. Autonomic disorder in systemic lupus erythematosus: autoimmune autonomic ganglionopathy. Immunological role of zinc in preterm neonates. Investigating the impact of tocilizumab on serum cytokines concentrations in Japanese FMF patients: a sub-analysis of the NUH01FMF study. Myositis-specific and myositis-associated autoantibodies: their clinical characteristics and potential pathogenic roles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1