Comparison study of bead-based and line-blot multiplex ANA immunoassays in the diagnosis of systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases.

OBJECTIVES

Detection of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) by immunofluorescence assay (IFA) is increasingly substituted by multiplex bead-based immunoassay (MBA) and line-blot immunoassay (LIA). This study is to compare the diagnostic performance of MBA and LIA ANA assays on clinically characterized patient samples.

METHODS

A total of 728 serum samples from 385 patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARD), 204 patients with non-SARD diseases, and 139 apparently healthy subjects were tested with the BioPlex 2200 ANA Screen and EuroLine ANA Profile 3 as the representative MBA and LIA technologies and HEp-2 ANA IFA. Clinical data were collected independent of laboratory analysis and later related to the ANA test results. The clinical diagnostic performances were analyzed using Analyse-it software.

RESULTS

The MBA demonstrated higher area under curve (AUC) compared to LIA (0.814 vs 0.761, p = 0.002) and HEp-2 IFA (0.814 vs 0.771, p = 0.008). The MBA and LIA ANA methods showed higher specificity (83.8% and 77.0% vs 67.6%, p < 0.001 and p = 0.005) but lower sensitivity (79.0% and 75.3% vs 86.5%, p < 0.001) compared to HEp-2 IFA. The MBA and LIA ANA revealed substantial to excellent agreements on specific antinuclear antibodies except anti-dsDNA, with the total agreement from 92.3 to 99.9% and Cohen's kappa from 0.71 to 0.98. The MBA demonstrated significantly higher sensitivity (58.1% vs 19.8%, p < 0.001) and comparable specificity (95.9% vs 97.5%, p = 0.221) on anti-dsDNA assay for the diagnosis of SLE compared to LIA.

CONCLUSIONS

The MBA and LIA ANA assays have higher specificity but lower sensitivity compared to HEp-2 IFA. There are good agreements between MBA and LIA ANA for the specific antinuclear antibodies except for anti-dsDNA. The MBA ANA demonstrated better assay performance compared to LIA as the MBA possesses higher sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of SARD. Key Points • The multiplex bead-based immunoassay (MBA) ANA outperformed line-blot immunoassay (LIA) and traditional HEp-2 IFA. • There are good agreements between the MBA BioPlex 2200 ANA Screen and LIA EuroLine ANA Profile 3 for the most of specific antinuclear antibodies except anti-dsDNA. • Additional anti-dsDNA testing is suggested when EuroLine ANA Profile 3 is used for the aid of SLE diagnosis and management. • The positive predictive value of both multiplex ANA assays can be substantially increased without significantly affecting negative predictive value by using at least two specific antinuclear antibodies for reporting a positive ANA result.