Limits...
Highlights on novel technologies for the detection of antibodies to Ro60, Ro52, and SS-B.

Infantino M, Bentow C, Seaman A, Benucci M, Atzeni F, Sarzi-Puttini P, Olivito B, Meacci F, Manfredi M, Mahler M - Clin. Dev. Immunol. (2013)

Bottom Line: There were 34 discrepant samples among all assays (20 anti-SS-B, 11 anti-Ro52, 3 anti-Ro60). 30/33 of retested samples (by D-tek dot blot) agreed with the QUANTA Flash results.QUANTA Flash and BioPlex 2200 show good qualitative agreement.The clinical performances were similar for anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 autoantibodies while differences were observed for anti-SS-B (La) antibodies.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Immunology and Allergology Laboratory Unit, Azienda Sanitaria di Firenze, San Giovanni di Dio Hospital, Florence, Italy.

ABSTRACT

Objective: We aimed to compare a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA, QUANTA Flash) on BIO-FLASH with a multiplex flow immunoassay (MFI) on BioPlex 2200 for the detection of antibodies to Ro60, Ro52, and SS-B.

Methods: The study included 241 samples, from patients suffering from systemic autoimmune diseases (n = 108) as well as disease controls (n = 133). All samples were tested for anti-Ro52, anti-Ro60, and anti-SS-B (La) antibodies on QUANTA Flash (INOVA Diagnostics, San Diego, USA) and BioPlex 2200 (Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc., Hercules, USA). Discrepant samples were tested by two independent methods: BlueDot/ANA and QUANTRIX Microarray (both D-tek, Belgium).

Results: The overall qualitative agreements were 95.4% (95% confidence interval, CI 92.0-97.7%) for anti-Ro52, 98.8% (95% CI 96.4-99.7%) for anti-Ro60, and 91.7% (95% CI 87.5-94.9%) for anti-SS-B antibodies. There were 34 discrepant samples among all assays (20 anti-SS-B, 11 anti-Ro52, 3 anti-Ro60). 30/33 of retested samples (by D-tek dot blot) agreed with the QUANTA Flash results. Similar findings were obtained with QUANTRIX Microarray kit.

Conclusion: QUANTA Flash and BioPlex 2200 show good qualitative agreement. The clinical performances were similar for anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 autoantibodies while differences were observed for anti-SS-B (La) antibodies.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Clinical comparative ROC analysis. Results of patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases were compared with controls. Cut-off values are indicated by arrows. For sensitivity and specificity, see Table 1. Results for anti-Ro60 (a), anti-Ro52 (b), and anti-SS-B antibodies (c) are shown.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3860079&req=5

fig3: Clinical comparative ROC analysis. Results of patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases were compared with controls. Cut-off values are indicated by arrows. For sensitivity and specificity, see Table 1. Results for anti-Ro60 (a), anti-Ro52 (b), and anti-SS-B antibodies (c) are shown.

Mentions: The prevalence and titers of anti-Ro52, anti-Ro60, and anti-SS-B antibodies in different cohorts using both assay methods can be found in Figure 2. Comparative ROC analyses were performed on all assays for patients with SARD compared with controls and showed similar results for QUANTA Flash and BioPlex 2200 for anti-Ro60 antibodies (see Figure 3). For anti-Ro52 antibodies the AUC value was significantly higher for QUANTA Flash compared to BioPlex 2200 (0.82 versus 0.69; P < 0.0001). However, the difference was found in the nonclinically relevant area of the AUC. For anti-SS-B antibodies the AUC value was slightly higher for QUANTA Flash compared to BioPlex 2200 (0.73 versus 0.69; P > 0.05). The sensitivities and specificities among SARD, SLE, and SjS patients are shown in Table 1.


Highlights on novel technologies for the detection of antibodies to Ro60, Ro52, and SS-B.

Infantino M, Bentow C, Seaman A, Benucci M, Atzeni F, Sarzi-Puttini P, Olivito B, Meacci F, Manfredi M, Mahler M - Clin. Dev. Immunol. (2013)

Clinical comparative ROC analysis. Results of patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases were compared with controls. Cut-off values are indicated by arrows. For sensitivity and specificity, see Table 1. Results for anti-Ro60 (a), anti-Ro52 (b), and anti-SS-B antibodies (c) are shown.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3860079&req=5

fig3: Clinical comparative ROC analysis. Results of patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases were compared with controls. Cut-off values are indicated by arrows. For sensitivity and specificity, see Table 1. Results for anti-Ro60 (a), anti-Ro52 (b), and anti-SS-B antibodies (c) are shown.
Mentions: The prevalence and titers of anti-Ro52, anti-Ro60, and anti-SS-B antibodies in different cohorts using both assay methods can be found in Figure 2. Comparative ROC analyses were performed on all assays for patients with SARD compared with controls and showed similar results for QUANTA Flash and BioPlex 2200 for anti-Ro60 antibodies (see Figure 3). For anti-Ro52 antibodies the AUC value was significantly higher for QUANTA Flash compared to BioPlex 2200 (0.82 versus 0.69; P < 0.0001). However, the difference was found in the nonclinically relevant area of the AUC. For anti-SS-B antibodies the AUC value was slightly higher for QUANTA Flash compared to BioPlex 2200 (0.73 versus 0.69; P > 0.05). The sensitivities and specificities among SARD, SLE, and SjS patients are shown in Table 1.

Bottom Line: There were 34 discrepant samples among all assays (20 anti-SS-B, 11 anti-Ro52, 3 anti-Ro60). 30/33 of retested samples (by D-tek dot blot) agreed with the QUANTA Flash results.QUANTA Flash and BioPlex 2200 show good qualitative agreement.The clinical performances were similar for anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 autoantibodies while differences were observed for anti-SS-B (La) antibodies.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Immunology and Allergology Laboratory Unit, Azienda Sanitaria di Firenze, San Giovanni di Dio Hospital, Florence, Italy.

ABSTRACT

Objective: We aimed to compare a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA, QUANTA Flash) on BIO-FLASH with a multiplex flow immunoassay (MFI) on BioPlex 2200 for the detection of antibodies to Ro60, Ro52, and SS-B.

Methods: The study included 241 samples, from patients suffering from systemic autoimmune diseases (n = 108) as well as disease controls (n = 133). All samples were tested for anti-Ro52, anti-Ro60, and anti-SS-B (La) antibodies on QUANTA Flash (INOVA Diagnostics, San Diego, USA) and BioPlex 2200 (Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc., Hercules, USA). Discrepant samples were tested by two independent methods: BlueDot/ANA and QUANTRIX Microarray (both D-tek, Belgium).

Results: The overall qualitative agreements were 95.4% (95% confidence interval, CI 92.0-97.7%) for anti-Ro52, 98.8% (95% CI 96.4-99.7%) for anti-Ro60, and 91.7% (95% CI 87.5-94.9%) for anti-SS-B antibodies. There were 34 discrepant samples among all assays (20 anti-SS-B, 11 anti-Ro52, 3 anti-Ro60). 30/33 of retested samples (by D-tek dot blot) agreed with the QUANTA Flash results. Similar findings were obtained with QUANTRIX Microarray kit.

Conclusion: QUANTA Flash and BioPlex 2200 show good qualitative agreement. The clinical performances were similar for anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 autoantibodies while differences were observed for anti-SS-B (La) antibodies.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus