Abstract
The IIF using the HEp-2 cell substrate should be still considered the “gold standard” techniques for determination of antinuclear antibody (ANA). Standardization and automation can be considered to be still in progress. Aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the commercially automated indirect immunofluorescent antinuclear HEp-2 antibody assay. The study was designed to compare two commercially available HEp-2 ANA by indirect immunofluorescent antibody assays using a sensitivity panel (120 clinically determined patients) and a specificity panel consisting of 78 clinically confirmed negative patients. We compared the NOVA View® system [INOVA Diagnostics San Diego, USA] with the new HELIOS Processor from AESKU Systems/AESKU.Diagnostics (Wendelsheim, Germany) to assess their capability for screening, pattern recognition and titration of the samples. These automated methods were directly compared to manual reading of the same processed slides on respective microscopes and also compared with the known clinical information. The results of the two automated methods were in very good agreement with recognizing negative and positive samples. The HELIOS system detected 188 samples correctly as negative or positive versus 187 detected by the NOVA View® system. The diagnostic sensitivity of the systems was 95.8 versus 96.7 % for HELIOS and NOVA View®, respectively. The systems exhibited a diagnostic specificity of 93.5 % for the HELIOS system and 91.0 % for the NOVA View®. Both systems are suitable for fast and reliable detection of positivity/negativity due to their high sensitivity and will lead to a further increase of standardization in autoimmunity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Fritzler MJ. Toward a new autoantibody diagnostic orthodoxy: understanding the bad, good and indifferent. Autoimmun Highlights. 2012;3:51–8.
Tozzoli R, Bizzaro N, Tonutti E, Villalta D, Bassetti D, Manoni F, et al. Guidelines for the laboratory use of autoantibody tests in the diagnosis and monitoring of autoimmune rheumatic diseases. Am J Clin Pathol. 2002;117:316–24.
Meroni PL, Schur PH. ANA screening an old test with new recommendations. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69:1420–2.
Wiik AS, Bizzaro N. Missing links in high quality diagnostics of inflammatory systemic rheumatic diseases. Autoimmun Highlights. 2012;3:35–49.
Solomon DH, Kavanaugh AJ, Schur PH. The ACR Ad hoc Committee on immunologic testing guidelines. Evidence-based guidelines for the use of immunologic tests: antinuclear antibody testing. Arthritis Rheum. 2002;47:434–44.
Gonzales DA, de Leon AC, Perez MDCR, Diaz BB, Hernandez AG, Garcia A, et al. Efficiency of different strategies to detect autoantibodies to extractable nuclear antigens. J Immunol Methods. 2010;360:89–95.
Sack U, Knoechner S, Warschkau H, Pigia U, Emmrich F, Kamprad M. Computer-assisted classification of Hep-2 immunofluorescence patterns in autoimmune diagnostics. Autoimmun Rev. 2003;2:298–304.
Hu V, Murphy RF. Automated interpretation of subcellular patterns from immunofluorescence microscopy. J Immunol Methods. 2004;290:93–105.
Rigon A, Soda P, Zennaro D, Iannello G, Afeltra A. Indirect immunofluorescence testing: in autoimmune diseases: assessment of digital images for diagnostic purpose. Cytom B. 2007;72B:472–7.
Tozzoli R, D`Aurizio F, Villalta D, Bizzaro N. Automation, consolidation, and integration in autoimmune diagnostics. Autoimmun Highlights. 2015;6:1–6.
Gelpí C, Pérez E, Roldan C. Efficiency of a solid-phase chemiluminescence immunoassay for detection of antinuclear and cytoplasmic autoantibodies compared with gold standard immunoprecipitation. Autoimmun Highlights. 2014;5:47–54.
Tozzoli R, Antico A, Porcelli B, Bassetti D. Automation in indirect immunofluorescence testing: a new step in the evolution of the autoimmunology laboratory. Autoimmun Highlights. 2012;3:59–65.
Bizzaro N, Antico A, Platzgummer S, Tonutti E, Bassetti D, Pesente F, Tozzoli R, Tampoia M, Villalta D. Automated antinuclear immunofluorescence antibody screening: a comparative study of sic computer-aided diagnostic systems. Autoimmun Rev. 2014;13(9):292–8.
Fritzler MJ. The antinuclear antibody test: last or lasting gasp? Arthritis Rheum. 2011;63:19–22.
Copple SS, Rashelles Giles S, Jaskowski TD, Gardiner AE, Wilson AM, Hill HR. Screening for IgG antinuclear antibodies by HEp-2 indirect fluorescent antibody assay and the need for standardization. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;137:825–30.
Wiik AS, Hoier Madsen M, Forslid J, Charles P, Meyeowitsch SCL. 70 a uniform fine grainy staining of the nucleoplasma and the chromosomal areas of metaphase and telophase cells, often with accentuated positive nucleoli.®®. J Autoimmun. 2010;35:276–90.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
M. Daves, V. Perkmann, A. Dall´Acqua, A. Joos and S. Platzgummer declare no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Daves, M., Blecken, J., Matthias, T. et al. New automated indirect immunofluorescent antinuclear antibody testing compares well with established manual immunofluorescent screening and titration for antinuclear antibody on HEp-2 cells. Immunol Res 65, 370–374 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12026-016-8874-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12026-016-8874-y