Department of Laboratory Medicine, Onze-Lieve-Vrouw Hospital, Aalst, Belgium.
Department of Rheumatology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouw Hospital, Aalst, Belgium.
Ann Rheum Dis. 2018 May;77(5):667-677. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-212365. Epub 2018 Jan 23.
Rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-cyclic citrullinated protein/peptide antibodies (ACPA) are integrated in the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The objectives of this study were to evaluate the technical and diagnostic performance of different RF and ACPA assays and to evaluate whether differences in performance impact RA classification.
Samples from 594 consecutive patients who for the first time consulted a rheumatologist (44 of whom were diagnosed with RA) and 26 extra newly diagnosed patients with RA were analysed with six different RF assays (Menarini, Thermo Fisher, Inova, Roche, Abbott, Euroimmun) and seven different ACPA assays (Menarini, Thermo Fisher, Inova, Roche, Abbott, Euro Diagnostica, Euroimmun).
We found differences in analytical performance between assays. There was poor numerical agreement between the different RF and ACPA assays. For all assays, the likelihood ratio for RA increased with increasing antibody levels. The areas under the curve of receiver operating characteristic analysis of the RF (range 0.676-0.709) and ACPA assays (range 0.672-0.769) only differed between some ACPA assays. Nevertheless, using the cut-off proposed by the manufacturer, there was a large variation in sensitivity and specificity between assays (mainly for RF). Consequently, depending on the assay used, a subgroup of patients (13% for RF, 1% for ACPA and 9% for RF/ACPA) might or might not be classified as RA according to the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria.
Due to poor harmonisation of RF and ACPA assays and of test result interpretation, RA classification according to 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria may vary when different assays are used.
类风湿因子 (RF) 和抗环瓜氨酸肽/肽抗体 (ACPA) 已纳入 2010 年美国风湿病学会/欧洲抗风湿病联盟 (ACR/EULAR) 类风湿关节炎 (RA) 分类标准。本研究的目的是评估不同 RF 和 ACPA 检测方法的技术和诊断性能,并评估性能差异是否会影响 RA 分类。
分析了 594 例首次就诊于风湿病医生的连续患者(其中 44 例被诊断为 RA)和 26 例新诊断的 RA 患者的样本,使用了六种不同的 RF 检测方法(Menarini、Thermo Fisher、Inova、Roche、Abbott、Euroimmun)和七种不同的 ACPA 检测方法(Menarini、Thermo Fisher、Inova、Roche、Abbott、Euro Diagnostica、Euroimmun)。
我们发现检测方法之间存在分析性能差异。不同的 RF 和 ACPA 检测方法之间的数值一致性较差。对于所有检测方法,随着抗体水平的升高,RA 的似然比增加。RF(范围 0.676-0.709)和 ACPA(范围 0.672-0.769)检测方法的受试者工作特征曲线下面积仅在某些 ACPA 检测方法之间存在差异。然而,使用制造商建议的临界值,不同检测方法之间的敏感性和特异性存在较大差异(主要是 RF)。因此,根据使用的检测方法,一部分患者(RF 为 13%,ACPA 为 1%,RF/ACPA 为 9%)可能会或可能不会根据 2010 ACR/EULAR 标准被分类为 RA。
由于 RF 和 ACPA 检测方法以及检测结果解释缺乏协调性,因此使用不同的检测方法时,根据 2010 ACR/EULAR 标准进行 RA 分类可能会有所不同。