Isabelle Peene

Detection and identification of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) in a large and consecutive cohort of serum samples referred for ANA testing

OBJECTIVE To provide data on (a) the probability of detecting antinuclear antibodies (ANA) in a large and consecutive cohort of serum samples referred for ANA testing and (b) the probability of detecting more specific antinuclear reactivities (anti-DNA and anti-extractable nuclear antigens (anti-ENA)) in serum samples with a positive screening test (indirect immunofluorescence on HEp-2 cells). METHODS Serum samples from 10 550 consecutive patients sent to the laboratory for ANA detection were analysed. In ANA positive serum samples (23.5% of referred serum samples), ANA were identified by indirect immunofluorescence on Crithidia, by immunodiffusion, and by line immunoassay. Because anti-SSA antibodies were the most frequently identified ANA, sensitively detected by line immunoassay, additional immunoassays were developed to confirm the specificity of the line immunoassay result. RESULTS At least one fine reactivity could be identified in 21.1% of ANA positive serum samples: anti-dsDNA in 3.2%; anti-ENA (anti-SSA 10.5%, anti-SSB 6.7%, anti-RNP 2.7%, anti-Sm 1.8%, anti-Scl70 1.2%, anti-Jo-1 0.2%) in 15.8%, rRNP and anti-Cenp-B in respectively 0.5% and 4.0%. Multiple reactivities were found in 7.9%. For anti-ENA antibodies, line immunoassay was more sensitive than immunodiffusion (15.4%v 7.7%; p<0.0001). The sensitive detection of anti-SSA antibodies by line immunoassay was confirmed by additional assays. CONCLUSIONS The data from this analysis are useful in estimating the probabilities of detecting specific ANA. Line immunoassay was shown to be a sensitive test for the detection of anti-ENA antibodies.

Anti-Ro52 reactivity is an independent and additional serum marker in connective tissue disease

Objective: To determine whether anti-Ro52 is an independent serum marker in connective tissue disease. Methods: Over a two year period, 1727 consecutive antinuclear antibody (ANA) positive serum samples were analysed in parallel by double immunodiffusion with thymus/spleen nuclear extract and by line immunoassay with recombinant Ro52, recombinant La/SSB, and natural Ro60. Sera that were only reactive towards Ro52 were further analysed by a variety of additional anti-SSA/Ro detection methods and by specific anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 assays. Natural purified SSA/Ro was analysed by immunoblot and protein sequencing. Results: Analysis of natural purified SSA/Ro (Immunovision, Springdale, AR) showed only Ro60 and no immunoreactive Ro52. Consequently, assays based on this substrate only identify sera with anti-Ro60 reactivity. Twenty serum samples showed anti-Ro52 without anti-Ro60 and anti-SSB/La on line immunoassay. By additional testing, 2/20 sera were found positive for anti-Ro60 reactivity. The remaining 18 sera were not identified by any of the classical anti-SSA/Ro assays and were considered to be reactive only with Ro52 and not with Ro60. This anti-Ro52 reactivity was confirmed by natural and recombinant Ro52 in 16/18 cases. 12/18 sera corresponded to connective tissue diseases. Conclusion: Anti-Ro52 positive sera without any evidence of anti-Ro60 and anti-La/SSB reactivity can be considered as an independent group that is systematically missed by classical anti-SSA/Ro detection methods owing to a bias towards anti-Ro60 reactivity. The anti-Ro52 sera are precipitin negative, not retrieved by SSA/Ro enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) based on natural SSA/Ro, and show no specific ANA fluorescence staining pattern. These findings together with the clinical data indicate that anti-Ro52 should be considered as an additional and independent serum marker.

Diagnostic associations in a large and consecutively identified population positive for anti-SSA and/or anti-SSB: the range of associated diseases differs according to the detailed serotype

Objective: To determine the diagnostic distribution in a consecutive anti-SSA and/or anti-SSB positive population. Methods: A total of 15 937 serum samples from 10 550 consecutive patients were analysed for antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) on HEp-2 cells. Serum samples positive for ANAs were analysed by immunodiffusion and line immunoassay with recombinant SSA-Ro52, natural SSA-Ro60, and recombinant SSB. Results: Among ANA positive patients in whom clinical information was available, 181 consecutive patients with anti-SSA and/or anti-SSB antibodies were identified, Disease associations were systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (45.3%), primary Sjögrens syndrome (pSS) (14.4%), scleroderma (8.8%), RA (7.7%), cutaneous lupus (7.7%), and dermatomyositis (2.2%). The ratio of diagnoses differed according to the anti-SSA/anti-SSB serotype. Scleroderma and dermatomyositis were enriched among mono-Ro52 reactive serum samples (34.2% and 10.5% respectively). Single reactivity towards Ro60 or anti-Ro60 with anti-Ro52 predisposed for SLE (80.0% and 52.2% respectively). Triple reactivity towards Ro52, Ro60, and SSB was primarily linked with SLE (55.8%) followed by pSS (20.9%). Anti-SSA on immunodiffusion increased the chance for SLE (62.8%), whereas isolated anti-SSB reactivity on immunodiffusion was less indicative for SLE (14.3%) and predisposed more for cutaneous lupus (23.8%) and pSS (33.3%). Conclusion: The diagnostic range associated with anti-SSA or anti-SSB reactivity differs significantly according to the detailed serotype defined by line immunoassay and immunodiffusion.

Sensitivity of the HEp-2000 substrate for the detection of anti-SSA/Ro60 antibodies.

Abstract: Anti-SSA/Ro antibodies are the most prevalent type of antinuclear antibody (ANA). Anti-SSA/Ro-positive sera may recognise two proteins: a 52 kDa (Ro52) and a 60 kDa (Ro60) subunit. We studied the sensitivity for Ro60 detection using the HEp-2000 substrate, which consists of HEp-2 cells transfected with Ro60 cDNA in an anti-SSA/Ro-positive population consecutively identified by double immunodiffusion (DID) with thymus/spleen nuclear extract and line immunoassay (LIA) with recombinant Ro52 and Ro60. One hundred and twenty-seven consecutive anti-SSA/Ro-positive sera defined by DID with thymus/spleen nuclear extract and LIA using recombinant Ro52 and Ro60 were analysed on HEp-2000 and DID with natural Ro60. Of these, 91 were anti-Ro60 positive on LIA and/or DID with natural Ro60. The HEp-2000 substrate detected 70/91 (sensitivity 77%) and correlated strongest with DID. Most of the missed anti-Ro60-positive sera had high ANA intensity. The substrate did not detect monospecific anti-Ro52 antibodies (sensitivity 9.7%; 3/31). HEp-2000 substrate can therefore be considered a reliable, simple and alternative method for DID in the detection of anti-Ro60 reactivity. Special follow-up should be given to sera with strong ANA patterns in which the SSA/Ro60 staining pattern may be hidden.

Prediction models for rheumatoid arthritis during diagnostic investigation: evaluation of combinations of rheumatoid factor, anti‐citrullinated protein/peptide antibodies and the human leucocyte antigen‐shared epitope

Objectives: To calculate the probabilities for rheumatoid arthritis in a consecutive cohort of patients during diagnostic investigation. Different logistic regression models evaluating the value of human leucocyte antigen (HLA)-shared epitope determination and testing for rheumatoid factor and anti-citrullinated protein/peptide antibodies (ACPA) were fitted. Methods: 1003 consecutive patients were included in the study, presenting a new diagnostic problem for which rheumatoid arthritis was included in the differential diagnosis. All patients were tested for ACPA, rheumatoid factor and HLA-shared epitope. Results: After 1 year, diagnoses were established: 153 patients had definite rheumatoid arthritis and 629 patients had rheumatoid arthritis excluded. Rheumatoid factor, used as a continuous marker, is useful in evaluating the probability for rheumatoid arthritis. Combined rheumatoid factor and shared epitope testing may provide additional predictive information, but combined ACPA and rheumatoid factor testing is superior. The redundancy of shared epitope testing in a model that includes ACPA testing can be explained by the high association between ACPA and shared epitope both in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and in those with non-rheumatoid arthritis. The value of rheumatoid factor testing increased if patients presented with at least one swollen joint at baseline. Conclusion: Valid probabilities for rheumatoid arthritis during routine diagnostic investigation were calculated, and showed that the potential additional value of shared epitope testing disappears when ACPA testing is available. Combined rheumatoid factor and ACPA testing is useful, especially when rheumatoid factor is considered as a continuous parameter reflecting an increasing probability for rheumatoid arthritis at higher rheumatoid factor titres. The value of (continuous) rheumatoid factor testing increases when the a priori chance is higher.

Analysis of the P wave with signal averaging to assess the risk of atrial fibrillation after coronary artery bypass surgery.

P wave signal averaging was performed in 91 consecutive patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting to detect patients at risk of postoperative atrial fibrillation (AF). Sixteen patients (17.5%) developed AF after surgery. The P wave duration on the signal-averaged electrocardiogram (ECG) and on surface ECG was prolonged in AF patients compared to others (respectively 141 ± 12 vs. 132 ± 12 ms and 124 ± 9 vs. 113 ± 9 ms). The root mean square voltages (RMS) of the total P wave were not different between the two groups; the RMS of the late portion of the P wave (late RMS) was significantly higher (0.25 ± 0.15 vs. 0.17 ± 0.10 µV) and the RMS of the first 110 ms of the P wave (early RMS) significantly lower (0.88 ± 0.28 vs. 1.09 ± 0.33 µV) in AF. The late/early RMS ratio was different (0.29 ± 0.16 vs. 0.17 ± 0.11). In a multivariate analysis only age and the late/early RMS ratio were predictive for AF.