Autoimmunity Highlights

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 35–49

Missing links in high quality diagnostics of inflammatory systemic rheumatic diseases

It is all about the patient!
Review Article

Abstract

The aim of this review is to focus attention on high quality diagnostics of systemic inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Though many steps in the diagnostic process from the first visit in a doctor’s office till a final diagnosis have been established a lot of things still must be done to improve quality assurance and secure fast and safe transmission of data from one step to the next. Some procedures inherent in early high quality diagnostics need to be worked out. A number of elements can be improved, some stumble stones can be removed, and a tighter collaboration between actors at different levels in the line of action in clinical and laboratory medicine can be organized. Several proposals have been made by international working groups such as the IUIS International Autoantibody Standardization Committee, and the EASI steering group in collaboration with their national EASI teams. Practical exercises carried out for more than three decades by the European Consensus Finding Study Group have proven to very useful. The review points at several principles worked out by these international expert groups can be useful in actual daily practice also in rheumatology. The hope is that the presentation will give rise to a continued discussion on how to link different parts of the diagnostic process together and strengthen collaboration between all teams involved in the diagnostic chain. The ultimate measure of success will be better clinical outcomes for patients and increased satisfaction in their families.

Keywords

Autoimmunity Antinuclear antibodies Laboratory diagnostics Harmonization Standardization Quality assurance 

References

  1. 1.
    Humbel RL (1993) Detection of antinuclear antibodies by immunofluorescence, part 1. In: Maini RN, van Venrooij WJ (eds) Manual of biological markers of disease, section A2. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 1–16Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wiik A, Høier-Madsen M, Forslid J, Charles P, Meyrowitsch (2010) Antinuclear antibodies: a contemporary nomenclature using HEp-2 cells. J Autoimmun 35:276–90Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fritzler MJ, Wiik A, Fritzler ML, Barr SG (2003) The use and abuse of commercial kits used to detect autoantibodies. Arthritis Res Ther 5:192–201PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shoenfeld Y, Cervera R, Gershwin ME (2008) Diagnostic criteria in autoimmune diseases. Humana Press, TotowaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wiik AS, Gordon TP, Kavanaugh AF, Lahita RG, Reeves W, van Venrooij WJ, Wilson MR, Fritzler M, The IUIS/WHO/AF/CDC Committee for the Standardization of Autoantibodies in Rheumatic and Related Diseases (2004) Cutting edge diagnostics in rheumatology: the role of patients, clinicians, and laboratory scientists in optimizing the use of autoimmune serology. Arthritis Rheum (Arthritis Care Res) 51:291–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wiik AS (2005) Anti-nuclear autoantibodies: clinical utility for diagnosis, prognosis, monitoring, and planning of treatment strategy in systemic immunoinflammatory diseases. Scand J Rheumatol 34:260–268PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fries JF (1984) The chronic disease data bank: first principles to future directions. J Med Philos 9:161–180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wiik AS, Fritzler MJ (2008) Laboratory tests in rheumatic disorders. In: Hochberg MC, Silman AJ, Smolen JS, Weinblatt ME, Weisman MH (eds) Rheumatology, 4th edn. Mosby Elsevier, Edinburg, pp 219–232Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wiik A, Cervera R, Haass M, Kallenberg C, Khamashta M, Meroni PL et al (2006) European attempts to set guidelines for improving diagnostics of autoimmune rheumatic disorders. Lupus 15:391–396PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tozzoli R, Bizzaro N (2012) The clinical autoimmunologist and the laboratory autoimmunologist: the two sides of the coin. Autoimmun Rev. Epub ahead of printGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bossuyt X, Louche C, Wiik A (2008) Standardisation in clinical laboratory medicine: an ethical reflection. Ann Rheum Dis 67:1061–1063PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chan EKL, Fritzler MJ, Wiik A, Andrade LEC, Reeves WH, Tincani A, Meroni PL, The IUIS/WHO/AF/CDC Committee for the Standardization of Autoantibodies in Rheumatic and Related Diseases (2006) AutoABSC.Org—Autoantibody Standardization Committee in 2006. Autoimmun Rev 6:577–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shoenfeld Y, Cervera R, Haass M, Kallenberg C, Khamashta M, Meroni PL, Piette J-C, Schmidt R, Wiik A (2007) EASI—The European Autoimmunity Standardisation Initiative: a new initiative that can contribute to agreed diagnostic models of diagnosing autoimmune disorders throughout. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1109:138–144PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    van Venrooij WJ, Charles P, Maini RN (1991) The consensus workshops for the detection of autoantibodies to intracellular antigens in rheumatic diseases. J Immunol Methods 140:181–189PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Meroni PL, Schur PH (2010) ANA screening: an old test with new recommendations. Ann Rheum Dis 69:1420–1422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kavanaugh A (2001) The utility of immunologic laboratory tests in patients with rheumatic diseases. Arthritis Rheum 44:2221–2223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fritzler MJ (2010) The antinuclear antibody test: last or lasting gasp? Arthritis Rheum 63:19–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bizzaro N, Wiik A (2004) Appropriateness in antinuclear antibody testing: from clinical request to strategic laboratory practice. Clin Exp Rheumatol 22:349–355PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Arbuckle MR, McClain MT, Rubertone MV, Scofield RH, Dennis GJ, James J et al (2003) Development of auto-antibodies before the clinical onset of systemic lupus erythematosus. New Engl J Med 349:1526–1533PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mariz HA, Sato EI, Barbosa SH, Rodrigues SH, Dellavance A, Andrade LEC (2011) Pattern on the antinuclear antibody HEp-2 test is a critical parameter for discriminating antinuclear antibody-positive healthy individuals and patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases. Arthritis Rheum 63:191–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wiik A, Lam K (2000) On the usability of extended DOORS for education and training, quality assurance and consensus formation. The EU CANTOR project HC 4003 (HC). Deliverable D09.1, version 2.1. The European Commission; 2001Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wiik A, Charles P, Meyrowitsch J (2011) Multi-centre collaboration is needed to reach a unified and strictly defined classification of IIF HEp-2 cell staining patterns. In: Conrad K, Chan EKL, Meroni PL, Shoenfeld Y (eds) Autoantigens, autoantibodies, autoimmunity, vol 7. Pabst, Lengerich, pp 634–646Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Conrad K, Schössler W, Hiepe F, Fritzler MJ (2007) Autoantibodies in systemic autoimmune diseases. A diagnostic reference, 2nd edn. Pabst, LengerichGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stinton LM, Eystathioy T, Selak S, Chan EK, Fritzler MJ (2004) Autoantibodies to protein transport and messenger RNA processing pathways: endosomes, lysosomes, Golgi complex, proteasomes, assemblyosomes, exosomes and GW bodies. Clin Immunol 110:30–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hiemann R, Büttner T, Krieger T, Roggenbuck D, Sack U, Conrad K (2009) Challenges of automated screening and differentiation of non-organ specific autoantibodies on HEp-2 cells. Autoimmunity Rev 9:17–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Egerer K, Roggenbuck D, Hiemann R, Weyer MG, Büttner T, Radau B (2010) Automated evaluation of autoantibodies on human epithelial-2 cells as an approach to standardize cell-based immuno-fluorescence tests. Arthritis Res Ther 12:R40PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tan EM, Feltkamp TE, Smolen JS, Butcher B, Dawkins R, Fritzler MJ et al (1997) Range of antinuclear antibodies in “healthy” individuals. Arthritis Rheum 40:1601–1611PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kavanaugh A, Russell T, Reveille J, Solomon DH, Homburger HA (2000) Guidelines for clinical use of the antinuclear antibody test and tests for specific autoantibodies to nuclear antigens. Arch Pathol Lab Med 124:71–81PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fritzler MJ, Wiik A (2006) Autoantibody assays, testing, and standardization. In: Rose NR, Mackay IR (eds) The autoimmune diseases, 4th edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1011–1022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ghirardello A, Villalta D, Morozzi G, Galeazzi M, Gerli R et al (2011) Diagnostic accuracy of currently available anti-double-stranded DNA antibody assays. An Italian multicentre study. Clin Exp Rheumatol 29:50–56PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sack U, Conrad K, Csernok E, Frank I, Hiepe GF, Krieger T, German EASI (European Autoimmunity Standardization Initiative) et al (2009) Autoantibody detection using indirect immunofluorescence on HEp-2 cells. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 134:1278–1282PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Damoiseax J, Tervaert JW, Derksen R, Hamann D, Hooijkaas H, Klasen I et al (2009) Autoantibody standardization in the Netherlands. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1173:10–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cervera R, Plaza A (2009) Guias de pratica clinica y laboratorio.Anticuerpos y enfermedades autoimmune. Sweden Diagnostics, BarcelonaGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Brooks RH (1994) Appropriateness: the next frontier. BMJ 308:218–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wiik AS (2003) Appropriateness in autoantibody testing in clinical medicine. Clin Chim Acta 333:177–180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Damoiseaux JGMC, Cohen Tervaert JW (2006) From ANA to ENA: how to proceed? Autoimmun Rev 5:10–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Laposata M (2004) Patient-specific narrative interpretations of complex clinical laboratory evaluations: who is competent to provide them? Clin Chem 50:471–472PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Shoenfeld Y, Gershwin ME, Meroni PL (2007) Autoantibodies, 2nd edn. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Satoh M, Chan JY, Ross SJ, Cerebelli A, Cavazzana I, Franceschini F et al (2011) Autoantibodies to survival of motor neuron complex in patients with polymyositis: immunoprecipitation of D, E, F and G proteins without other components of small nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Arthritis Rheum 63:1972–1978PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zieve G, Fury M, Janssen EJR (1993) Analysis of autoimmune sera by immuno-precipitation of cellular RNPs. In: van Venrooij WJ, Maini RN (eds) Manual of biological markers of disease, section A7. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kuwana M, Kaburaki J, Okano Y, Tojo T, Homma M (1994) Clinical and prognostic associations based on serum antinuclear antibodies in Japanese patients with systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum 37:75–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kuwana M, Kaburaki J, Mimori T, Kawakami Y, Tojo T (2000) Longitudinal analysis of autoantibody response to topoisomerase I in systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum 43:1074–1084PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mierau R, Moinzadeh P, Riemekasten G, Melchers I, Reichenberger F et al (2011) Frequency of disease-associated and other nuclear autoantibodies in patients of the German network for systemic scleroderma: correlation with clinical features. Arthritis Res Ther 13:R172PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Walker UA, Tyndall A, Czirja′k L, Denton C, Farge-Bancel D, Kowal-Bielecka O, Müller-Ladner U, Bocelli-Tyndall C, Matucci-Cerinic M, EUSTAR et al (2007) Clinical risk assessment of organ manifestations in systemic sclerosis: a report from the EULAR scleroderma trials and research group database. Ann Rheum Dis 66:754–763Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Koenig M, Joyal F, Fritzler MJ, Roussin A, Abrahamowicz M, Boire G et al (2008) Autoantibodies and microvascular damage are independent predictive factors for the progression of Raynaud’s phenomenon to systemic sclerosis: a twenty-year prospective study of 568 patients, with validation of proposed criteria for early systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum 58:3902–3912PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Koenig M, Fritzler MJ, Targoff IN, Troyanov Y, Sénecal J-L (2007) Heterogeneity of autoantibodies in 100 patients with autoimmune myositis: insights in clinical features and outcomes. Arthritis Res Ther 9:R78PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tan EM, Smolen JS, McDougal JS, Butcher BT, Conn D, Dawkins R et al (1999) A critical evaluation of enzyme immunoassays for detection of antinuclear antibodies of defined specificity I. Precision, sensitivity, and specificity. Arthritis Rheum 42:455–464PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Tan EM, Smolen J, McDougal JS, Fritzler MJ, Gordon T, Hardin JA et al (2002) A critical evaluation of enzyme immunoassays for detection of antinuclear antibodies of defined specificities. II. Potential for quantitation of antibody content. J Rheumatol 29:68–74PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Fritzler MJ, Wiik A, Tan EM, Smolen JS, McDougal JS, Chan EK et al (2003) A critical evaluation of enzyme immunoassay kits for detection of antinuclear antibodies of defined specificities. III. Comparative performance characteristics of academic and manufacturer’s laboratories. J Rheumatol 30:2374–2381PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Van der Cruyssen B, Hoffman IE, Zmierczak H, van den Berghe M, Kruithof E, de Rycke L et al (2005) Anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies may occur in patients with psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 64:1145–1149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Klareskog L, Catrina AI, Paget S (2009) Rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet 373:659–672PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    van Venrooij WJ, van Beers JJ, Pruijn GJ (2011) Anti-CCP antibodies: the past, the present and the future. Nat Rev Rheumatol 7:391–398PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wiik AS, van Venrooij WJ, Pruijn GJM (2010) All you wanted to know about anti-CCP but were afraid to ask. Autoimmun Rev 10:90–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Bizzaro N, Tonutti E, Tozzoli R, Villalta D (2007) Analytical and diagnostic characteristics of 11 2nd- and 3rd-generation immunoenzymatic methods for the detection of antibodies to citrullinated proteins. Clin Chem 53:1527–1533PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    ISO 15189:2003. Medical laboratories: particular requirements for quality and competence. ISO, Geneva, 2003Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bizzaro N, Tozzoli R, Tonutti E, Piazza A, Manoni F, Ghirardello A et al (1998) Variability between methods to determine ANA, anti-dsDNA and anti-ENA autoantibodies: a collaborative study with the biomedical industry. J Immunol Methods 219:99–107PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Villalta D, Bizzaro N, Platzgummer S, Antico A, Tampoia M, Camogliano L et al (2005) Accuracy of semiquantitative immunoenzymatic methods in quantitation of anti-topoisomerase I (Scl-70) antibodies. Clin Rheumatol 24:453–459PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (2006) Quality Assurance of Laboratory Tests for Autoantibodies to Nuclear Antigens: (1) Indirect Fluorescence Assay for Microscopy and (2) Microtiter Enzyme Immunoassay Methods; Approved Guideline, 2nd ed. CLSI document I/LA2-A2. Wayne, PA: CLSIGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Bayer PM, Bauerfeind S, Bienvenu J, Fabien N, Frei PC, Gildburd B (1999) Multicenter evaluation study on an new HEp2 ANA screening enzyme immune assay. J Autoimmun 13:89–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Rondell JMM, Van Gelder M, Van der Leeden H, Dinkelaar RB (1999) Different strategies in the laboratory diagnosis of autoimmune disease: immunofluorescence, enzyme-linked-immunosorbent assay or both? Ann Clin Biochem 36:189–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Tonutti E, Bassetti D, Piazza A, Visentini D, Poletto M, Bassetto F et al (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of ELISA methods as an alternative test to indirect immunofluorescence for the detection of antinuclear antibodies. Evaluation of five commercial kits. Autoimmunity 37:171–176Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Forsman RW (1996) Why is the laboratory an afterthought for managed care organizations? Clin Chem 42:813–816PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Tan EM (1993) International cooperative activities in the standardization of antinuclear antibodies. Manual of biological markers of disease, vol A1. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 1–5Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Smolen JS, Butcher B, Fritzler MJ, Gordon T, Hardin J, Kalden JR et al (1997) Reference sera for antibuclear antibodies. II. Further definition of antibody specificities in international antinuclear antibody reference sera by immunofluorescence and Western blotting. Arthritis Rheum 40:413–418PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Carey RN (2006) User verification of performances for precision and trueness; approved guideline. Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute (CLSI) document EP15-A2, 2nd edn. CLSI:ISBN 1-56238-000-0, WayneGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Clinical BiochemistryClinical Immunology and Biomarkers, Statens Serum InstitutCopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.Laboratory of Clinical PathologyS. Antonio HospitalTolmezzoItaly
  3. 3.HørsholmDenmark

Personalised recommendations