rss
Ann Rheum Dis 2001;60:1131-1136 doi:10.1136/ard.60.12.1131
  • Extended report

Detection and identification of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) in a large and consecutive cohort of serum samples referred for ANA testing

  1. I Peenea,
  2. L Meheusb,
  3. E M Veysa,
  4. F De Keysera
  1. aDepartment of Rheumatology, Ghent University Hospital, Belgium, bInnogenetics NV, Ghent, Belgium
  1. Dr F De Keyser, Department of Rheumatology 0K12IB, University Hospital Ghent, De pintelaan 185, 9000 Ghent, Belgiumfilip.dekeyser{at}rug.ac.be
  • Accepted 3 May 2001

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To provide data on (a) the probability of detecting antinuclear antibodies (ANA) in a large and consecutive cohort of serum samples referred for ANA testing and (b) the probability of detecting more specific antinuclear reactivities (anti-DNA and anti-extractable nuclear antigens (anti-ENA)) in serum samples with a positive screening test (indirect immunofluorescence on HEp-2 cells).

METHODS Serum samples from 10 550 consecutive patients sent to the laboratory for ANA detection were analysed. In ANA positive serum samples (23.5% of referred serum samples), ANA were identified by indirect immunofluorescence on Crithidia, by immunodiffusion, and by line immunoassay. Because anti-SSA antibodies were the most frequently identified ANA, sensitively detected by line immunoassay, additional immunoassays were developed to confirm the specificity of the line immunoassay result.

RESULTS At least one fine reactivity could be identified in 21.1% of ANA positive serum samples: anti-dsDNA in 3.2%; anti-ENA (anti-SSA 10.5%, anti-SSB 6.7%, anti-RNP 2.7%, anti-Sm 1.8%, anti-Scl70 1.2%, anti-Jo-1 0.2%) in 15.8%, rRNP and anti-Cenp-B in respectively 0.5% and 4.0%. Multiple reactivities were found in 7.9%. For anti-ENA antibodies, line immunoassay was more sensitive than immunodiffusion (15.4%v 7.7%; p<0.0001). The sensitive detection of anti-SSA antibodies by line immunoassay was confirmed by additional assays.

CONCLUSIONS The data from this analysis are useful in estimating the probabilities of detecting specific ANA. Line immunoassay was shown to be a sensitive test for the detection of anti-ENA antibodies.

Footnotes

    This Article

    1. Abstract
    2. Full text
    3. PDF

    Responses

    1. Submit a response
    2. No responses published

    Register for free content

    The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

    Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.