» Articles » PMID: 27368807

Next-Generation Autoantibody Testing by Combination of Screening and Confirmation-the CytoBead® Technology

Overview
Date 2016 Jul 3
PMID 27368807
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Occurrence of autoantibodies (autoAbs) is a hallmark of autoimmune diseases, and the analysis thereof is an essential part in the diagnosis of organ-specific autoimmune and systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARD), especially connective tissue diseases (CTDs). Due to the appearance of autoAb profiles in SARD patients and the complexity of the corresponding serological diagnosis, different diagnostic strategies have been suggested for appropriate autoAb testing. Thus, evolving assay techniques and the continuous discovery of novel autoantigens have greatly influenced the development of these strategies. Antinuclear antibody (ANA) analysis by indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) on tissue and later cellular substrates was one of the first tests introduced into clinical routine and is still an indispensable tool for CTD serology. Thus, screening for ANA by IIF is recommended to be followed by confirmatory testing of positive findings employing different assay techniques. Given the continuous growth in the demand for autoAb testing, IIF has been challenged as the standard method for ANA and other autoAb analyses due to lacking automation, standardization, modern data management, and human bias in IIF pattern interpretation. To address these limitations of autoAb testing, the CytoBead® technique has been introduced recently which enables automated interpretation of cell-based IIF and quantitative autoAb multiplexing by addressable microbead immunoassays in one reaction environment. Thus, autoAb screening and confirmatory testing can be combined for the first time. The present review discusses the history of autoAb assay techniques in this context and gives an overview and outlook of the recent progress in emerging technologies.

Citing Articles

Efficiency scale for scattering luminescent particles linked to fundamental and measurable spectroscopic properties.

Wurth C, Behnke T, Gienger J, Resch-Genger U Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):6254.

PMID: 37069220 PMC: 10110600. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-32933-6.


Reliability and reproducibility of antinuclear antibody testing in pediatric rheumatology practice.

Ostrov B Front Med (Lausanne). 2023; 9:1071115.

PMID: 36714114 PMC: 9875300. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.1071115.


Autoimmunity in 2017.

Selmi C Clin Rev Allergy Immunol. 2018; 55(3):239-253.

PMID: 30051260 DOI: 10.1007/s12016-018-8699-7.

References
1.
Grossmann K, Roggenbuck D, Schroder C, Conrad K, Schierack P, Sack U . Multiplex assessment of non-organ-specific autoantibodies with a novel microbead-based immunoassay. Cytometry A. 2011; 79(2):118-25. DOI: 10.1002/cyto.a.21009. View

2.
Tozzoli R, DAurizio F, Villalta D, Bizzaro N . Automation, consolidation, and integration in autoimmune diagnostics. Auto Immun Highlights. 2015; 6(1-2):1-6. PMC: 4536237. DOI: 10.1007/s13317-015-0067-5. View

3.
Rondeel J, van Gelder W, van der Leeden H, Dinkelaar R . Different strategies in the laboratory diagnosis of autoimmune disease: immunofluorescence, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or both?. Ann Clin Biochem. 1999; 36 ( Pt 2):189-95. DOI: 10.1177/000456329903600209. View

4.
Chan E, Hamel J, Buyon J, Tan E . Molecular definition and sequence motifs of the 52-kD component of human SS-A/Ro autoantigen. J Clin Invest. 1991; 87(1):68-76. PMC: 294993. DOI: 10.1172/JCI115003. View

5.
Chiaro T, Davis K, Wilson A, Suh-Lailam B, Tebo A . Significant differences in the analytic concordance between anti-dsDNA IgG antibody assays for the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus--implications for inter-laboratory testing. Clin Chim Acta. 2011; 412(11-12):1076-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.cca.2011.02.025. View