Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Clinical Rheumatology 7/2016

05.04.2016 | Original Article

Antinuclear antibody testing: discordance between commercial laboratories

Erschienen in: Clinical Rheumatology | Ausgabe 7/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Antinuclear antibody (ANA) test results frequently affect the course of patients’ evaluations, diagnosis, and treatment, but different laboratory centers may yield conflicting results. This study investigated the degree of agreement between laboratory results in a group of subjects who had ANA testing performed at two commercial laboratories. This was a chart review study, in which all ANA tests ordered by the authors from one commercial laboratory over a 4-year period were queried. Corresponding patient charts were reviewed, and if ANA testing had also been performed at the second commercial laboratory, subjects were entered into the study. The primary measurement was agreement between paired ANA results, and we performed sensitivity analysis using varying criteria defining agreement (criteria A to criteria D [strictest to most lenient definition of agreement]). Other data captured included relevant data obtained through the course of evaluation (e.g., presenting complaints, exam findings, other laboratory data) and final diagnoses. Of 101 paired ANA tests, there was 18 % agreement according to the strictest criteria and 42 % according to the most lenient. Of the seven subjects with ANA-associated rheumatic disease, none of the paired tests were in agreement according to criteria A (two agreed according to criteria D). Our findings demonstrate poor agreement between paired ANA tests performed at two commercial laboratories. The low level of agreement may have far-reaching clinical implications. Specifically, this finding calls into question the reliability of ANA testing as it is currently performed and suggests that results may in part depend upon the laboratory center to which patients are referred.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Abeles AM, Abeles M (2013) The clinical utility of a positive anti-nuclear antibody test. Am J Med 126:342–348CrossRefPubMed Abeles AM, Abeles M (2013) The clinical utility of a positive anti-nuclear antibody test. Am J Med 126:342–348CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Slater CA, Davis RB, Shmerling RH (1996) Antinuclear antibody testing. A study of clinical utility. Arch Intern Med 156:1421–1425CrossRefPubMed Slater CA, Davis RB, Shmerling RH (1996) Antinuclear antibody testing. A study of clinical utility. Arch Intern Med 156:1421–1425CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Malleson PN, Sailer M, Mackinnon MJ (1997) Usefulness of antinuclear antibody testing to screen for rheumatic diseases. Arch Dis Child 77:299–304CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Malleson PN, Sailer M, Mackinnon MJ (1997) Usefulness of antinuclear antibody testing to screen for rheumatic diseases. Arch Dis Child 77:299–304CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Gniewek RA, Stites DP, McHugh TM, Hilton JF, Nakagawa M (1997) Comparison of antinuclear antibody testing methods: immunofluorescence assay versus enzyme immunoassay. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 4:185–188PubMedPubMedCentral Gniewek RA, Stites DP, McHugh TM, Hilton JF, Nakagawa M (1997) Comparison of antinuclear antibody testing methods: immunofluorescence assay versus enzyme immunoassay. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 4:185–188PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Jaskowski TD, Schroder C, Martins TB, Mouritsen CL, Litwin CM, Hill HR (1996) Screening for anti nuclear antibodies by enzyme immunoassay. Am J Clin Pathol 105:468–473CrossRefPubMed Jaskowski TD, Schroder C, Martins TB, Mouritsen CL, Litwin CM, Hill HR (1996) Screening for anti nuclear antibodies by enzyme immunoassay. Am J Clin Pathol 105:468–473CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Fernandez SA, Lobo AZ, Oliveira ZN, Fukumori LM, Prigo AM, Rivitti EA (2003) Prevalence of antinuclear autoantibodies in the serum of normal blood donors. Rev Hosp Clin Fac Med Sao Paulo 58:315–319CrossRefPubMed Fernandez SA, Lobo AZ, Oliveira ZN, Fukumori LM, Prigo AM, Rivitti EA (2003) Prevalence of antinuclear autoantibodies in the serum of normal blood donors. Rev Hosp Clin Fac Med Sao Paulo 58:315–319CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Verstegen G, Duyck MC, Meeus P, Ravelingien I, De Vlam K (2009) Detection and identification of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) in a large community hospital. Acta Clin Belg 64:317–323CrossRefPubMed Verstegen G, Duyck MC, Meeus P, Ravelingien I, De Vlam K (2009) Detection and identification of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) in a large community hospital. Acta Clin Belg 64:317–323CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Maguire GA, Ginawi A, Lee J, Lim AY, Wood G, Houghton S et al (2009) Clinical utility of ANA measured by ELISA compared with ANA measured by immunofluorescence. Rheumatology (Oxford) 48:1013–1014CrossRef Maguire GA, Ginawi A, Lee J, Lim AY, Wood G, Houghton S et al (2009) Clinical utility of ANA measured by ELISA compared with ANA measured by immunofluorescence. Rheumatology (Oxford) 48:1013–1014CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Russell AS, Johnston T (2003) Relative value of commercial kits for ANA testing. Clin Exp Rheumatol 21:477–480PubMed Russell AS, Johnston T (2003) Relative value of commercial kits for ANA testing. Clin Exp Rheumatol 21:477–480PubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Emlen W, O’Neill L (1997) Clinical significance of antinuclear antibodies. Arthritis Rheum 40:1612–1618CrossRefPubMed Emlen W, O’Neill L (1997) Clinical significance of antinuclear antibodies. Arthritis Rheum 40:1612–1618CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Narain S, Richards HB, Satoh M, Sarmiento M et al (2004) Diagnostic accuracy for lupus and other systemic autoimmune diseases in the community setting. Arch Intern Med 164:2435–2441CrossRefPubMed Narain S, Richards HB, Satoh M, Sarmiento M et al (2004) Diagnostic accuracy for lupus and other systemic autoimmune diseases in the community setting. Arch Intern Med 164:2435–2441CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Antinuclear antibody testing: discordance between commercial laboratories
Publikationsdatum
05.04.2016
Erschienen in
Clinical Rheumatology / Ausgabe 7/2016
Print ISSN: 0770-3198
Elektronische ISSN: 1434-9949
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-016-3241-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2016

Clinical Rheumatology 7/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Echinokokkose medikamentös behandeln oder operieren?

06.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Die Therapie von Echinokokkosen sollte immer in spezialisierten Zentren erfolgen. Eine symptomlose Echinokokkose kann – egal ob von Hunde- oder Fuchsbandwurm ausgelöst – konservativ erfolgen. Wenn eine Op. nötig ist, kann es sinnvoll sein, vorher Zysten zu leeren und zu desinfizieren. 

Umsetzung der POMGAT-Leitlinie läuft

03.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Seit November 2023 gibt es evidenzbasierte Empfehlungen zum perioperativen Management bei gastrointestinalen Tumoren (POMGAT) auf S3-Niveau. Vieles wird schon entsprechend der Empfehlungen durchgeführt. Wo es im Alltag noch hapert, zeigt eine Umfrage in einem Klinikverbund.

Proximale Humerusfraktur: Auch 100-Jährige operieren?

01.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Mit dem demographischen Wandel versorgt auch die Chirurgie immer mehr betagte Menschen. Von Entwicklungen wie Fast-Track können auch ältere Menschen profitieren und bei proximaler Humerusfraktur können selbst manche 100-Jährige noch sicher operiert werden.

Die „Zehn Gebote“ des Endokarditis-Managements

30.04.2024 Endokarditis Leitlinie kompakt

Worauf kommt es beim Management von Personen mit infektiöser Endokarditis an? Eine Kardiologin und ein Kardiologe fassen die zehn wichtigsten Punkte der neuen ESC-Leitlinie zusammen.

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.