» Articles » PMID: 31401900

Two Novel Technologies for the Detection of Anti-cardiolipin and Anti β2-Glycoprotein Antibodies in the Real Life: Chemiluminescent in Comparison to the Addressable Laser Bead Immunoassays

Overview
Journal Immunol Invest
Publisher Informa Healthcare
Date 2019 Aug 13
PMID 31401900
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In the present study, we evaluated two novel technologies, the chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA) QUANTA Flash on BIO-FLASH (Inova Diagnostics, San Diego, CA, USA) and the addressable laser bead immunoassay (ALBIA) on BioPlex™ 2200 (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA) for the detection of anti-cardiolipin IgG/IgM (aCL) and anti-β2-glycoprotein IgG/IgM (aβ2GPI) antibodies. The study was performed on 134 samples from consecutive patients (59 males and 75 females, mean age 54 ± 10 years) who consulted a rheumatologist because thrombosis and/or pregnancy complications were present or another immunological disease (Sjogren's syndrome, inflammatory arthritis). Fourteen patients of the total fulfilled 25the Sydney criteria for APS and for these patients previous results of aPLs were available. Sera were tested for aCL and aβ2GPI of IgG and IgM isotypes using CIA (BIO-FLASH) and ALBIA (BioPlex™ 2200). Overall agreement between CIA and ALBIA ranged from 88.1% (aCL IgG) to 97.8% (aβ2GPI IgG). Cohen's kappa coefficient ranged from 0.53 to 0.91, implying moderate to almost perfect agreement. Almost perfect agreement was found between BioPlex™ 2200 and BIO-FLASH aβ2GPI IgG and aCL IgM with Cohen's kappa of 0.91 and 0.88, respectively. On the other hand, moderate agreement was found between BioPlex™ 2200 and BIO-FLASH aCL IgG and β2GPI IgM assays with Cohen's kappa of 0.57 and 0.53, respectively. The two novel technologies look promising and comparable but further studies with larger cohorts are needed to contribute to the better understanding of the new aPLs antibodies assays performance.

Citing Articles

Establishment of cutoff values for anti-β2 glycoprotein I antibodies in women of reproductive age in Southwest China.

Liu C, Yan L, Zhang M, Gou Y, Duan Y, Liu T Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):20529.

PMID: 39227704 PMC: 11371915. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-71549-2.


Antiphospholipid Antibody Testing in a Maximum Care Hospital: Method-Dependent Differences.

Kocijancic M, Goj T, Peter A, Klein R, Horber S J Clin Med. 2024; 13(15).

PMID: 39124794 PMC: 11312883. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13154528.


Laboratory Diagnosis of Antiphospholipid Syndrome: Insights and Hindrances.

Vandevelde A, Devreese K J Clin Med. 2022; 11(8).

PMID: 35456258 PMC: 9025581. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11082164.


Comparison of Different Test Systems for the Detection of Antiphospholipid Antibodies in a Chinese Cohort.

Hu C, Li S, Xie Z, You H, Jiang H, Shi Y Front Immunol. 2021; 12:648881.

PMID: 34276646 PMC: 8283786. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.648881.


Current Promising Biomarkers and Methods in the Diagnostics of Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Review.

Bradacova P, Slavik L, Ulehlova J, Skoumalova A, Ullrychova J, Prochazkova J Biomedicines. 2021; 9(2).

PMID: 33567576 PMC: 7914732. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines9020166.