Harich Raya, Roger Christelle, Garnier Lorna, Bienvenu Jacques, Fabien Nicole
Department of Immunology, Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Claude Bernard University Lyon I, Pierre-Bénite, France.
Department of Immunology, Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Claude Bernard University Lyon I, Pierre-Bénite, France.
Clin Biochem. 2014 Apr;47(6):485-8. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2014.02.010. Epub 2014 Feb 19.
The aims of our study were to compare in a cohort of 705 patients the diagnostic performance of two tests to detect autoantibodies to cyclic citrullinated peptides (CCP) and to determine whether a bead-based assay within a multiplex flow immunoassay (MFA) can be used instead of an enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) technique in routine practice.
Six hundred and thirty patients with rheumatic symptoms and 75 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were tested for anti-CCP autoantibodies using two techniques: ELISA (Inova) and MFA (BioPlex, Bio-Rad).
Using kappa coefficient, there was an excellent agreement between ELISA and MFA when comparing 630 patients with rheumatic symptoms (κ coefficient, 0.82). In this cohort 174 patients were identified as suffering from RA, while 456 patients suffered from other diseases. Sensitivity and specificity values of anti-CCP autoantibodies for RA were 70.7% and 92.3% for ELISA and 64.4% and 92.8% for MFA. The positive and negative predictive values were 77.4% and 89.2% for ELISA and 77.2% and 87.2% for MFA, respectively. There were no differences in the diagnostic performances between the two assays (Z=0.67). The specificity values of anti-CCP autoantibodies analysing patients with SLE were 97.3% with MFA and 96% with ELISA with an excellent agreement between the methods (98.7%; κ coefficient, 0.79).
Concordance between ELISA and MFA is high in routine practice. Overall, MFA is a powerful tool for rapid assessment of anti-CCP autoantibodies and can replace the ELISA technique, which could be used as a second-line test in some cases.
我们研究的目的是在705例患者队列中比较两种检测抗环瓜氨酸肽(CCP)自身抗体的诊断性能,并确定在常规实践中多重流式免疫分析(MFA)中的基于微珠的检测方法是否可替代酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)技术。
采用两种技术对630例有风湿症状的患者和75例系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)患者进行抗CCP自身抗体检测:ELISA(Inova)和MFA(BioPlex,伯乐公司)。
采用kappa系数,比较630例有风湿症状的患者时,ELISA和MFA之间具有极好的一致性(κ系数为0.82)。在该队列中,174例患者被诊断为类风湿性关节炎(RA),456例患者患有其他疾病。ELISA检测RA的抗CCP自身抗体的敏感性和特异性值分别为70.7%和92.3%,MFA分别为64.4%和92.8%。ELISA的阳性和阴性预测值分别为77.4%和89.2%,MFA分别为77.2%和87.2%。两种检测方法的诊断性能无差异(Z = 0.67)。分析SLE患者时,MFA检测抗CCP自身抗体的特异性值为97.3%,ELISA为96%,两种方法之间具有极好的一致性(98.7%;κ系数为0.79)。
在常规实践中,ELISA和MFA之间的一致性很高。总体而言,MFA是快速评估抗CCP自身抗体的有力工具,可替代ELISA技术,在某些情况下ELISA技术可作为二线检测方法。