Anti-TIF-1γ Antibody Detection Using a Commercial Kit Vs In-House Immunoblot: Usefulness in Clinical Practice

Overview

Journal Front Immunol

Specialty Allergy & Immunology

Date 2021 Feb 22

PMID 33613568

Citations 3

Authors

Anais Mariscal

Milena Milan

Andres Baucells

Maria Angeles Martinez

Andrea Garcia Guillen

Ernesto Trallero-Araguas

Marcelo Alvarado-Cardenas

Laura Martinez-Martinez

Leticia Alserawan

Teresa Franco-Leyva

Maria Teresa Sanz-Martinez

Laura Vinas-Gimenez

Hector Corominas

Candido Juarez

Ivan Castellvi

Albert Selva-OCallaghan

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: Anti-TIF-1γ autoantibody detection is important for cancer screening in patients with dermatomyositis. The gold standard for anti-TIF-1γ detection, immunoprecipitation, is only available from a few specialized laboratories worldwide, so commercial ELISA/immunoblot tests have emerged in recent years. To analyze their usefulness in diagnosing cancer-associated dermatomyositis, we compared Euroimmun Euroline profile with our previously validated in-house immunoblot assay with human recombinant TIF-1γ.

Methods: We included 308 adult patients from Hospital de la Santa Creu I Sant Pau and Vall Hebrón Hospital (Barcelona, Spain) tested for anti-TIF-1γ autoantibodies using the Euroline profile and an in-house immunoblot assay.

Results: A total of 27 anti-TIF-1γ were detected by the Euroline and 12 by the in-house assay. Fair agreement was observed between Euroline and the in-house immunoblot Cohen's kappa 0.3163. Expected prevalence of anti-TIF-1γ autoantibodies was observed for the two methods for dermatomyositis and undifferentiated connective tissue diseases, but unexpectedly high prevalence of anti-TIF-1γ autoantibodies was detected by Euroline compared to the in-house immunoblot for other diseases (16.5% Euroline vs 0.8% in-house immunoblot, p<0.01). The in-house IB compared to Euroline more reliably detected cancer in patients with DM with anti-TIF-1γ antibodies (p=0.0014 vs p=0.0502 for in-house immunoblot vs Euroline).

Conclusion: We recommend using a second validated method to confirm Euroline-detected anti-TIF-1γ antibodies when the dermatomyositis diagnosis is not definitive. Furthermore, in the context of definite DM diagnosis with negative anti-TIF-1γ antibodies by Euroline and no other myositis specific antibody, is also recommendable to confirm by a second validated method.

Citing Articles

Applicability of a serodiagnostic line blot for idiopathic inflammatory myopathy: the muscle biopsy is not all.

Fontana P, da Silva V, Corazzini R, Athayde N, Ferreira da Silva A, Brockhausen I Front Neurol. 2025; 15:1504260.

PMID: 39835155 PMC: 11743459. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1504260.

Prevalence and clinical significance of anti-SSA antibody in the Chinese health screening population.

Jia Y, Luan S, Huang S, Zhang W, Li M, Xu T Clin Exp Immunol. 2024; 218(2):169-176.

PMID: 39136066 PMC: 11482497. DOI: 10.1093/cei/uxae073.

ELISA, protein immunoprecipitation and line blot assays for anti-TIF1-gamma autoantibody detection in cancer-associated dermatomyositis.

Selickaja S, Galindo-Feria A, Dani L, Mimori T, Ronnelid J, Holmqvist M Rheumatology (Oxford). 2022; 61(12):4991-4996.

PMID: 35579337 PMC: 9707101. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac288.

Profiling of Myositis Specific Antibodies and Composite Scores as an Aid in the Differential Diagnosis of Autoimmune Myopathies.

Mahler M, Malyavantham K, Seaman A, Bentow C, Anunciacion-Llunell A, Sanz-Martinez M Diagnostics (Basel). 2021; 11(12).

PMID: 34943483 PMC: 8699835. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11122246.

References

Trallero-Araguas E, Rodrigo-Pendas J, Selva-OCallaghan A, Martinez-Gomez X, Bosch X, Labrador-Horrillo M . Usefulness of anti-p155 autoantibody for diagnosing cancer-associated dermatomyositis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arthritis Rheum. 2011; 64(2):523-32. DOI: 10.1002/art.33379. View

Aggarwal R, Oddis C, Goudeau D, Fertig N, Metes I, Stephens C . Anti-transcription intermediary factor 1-gamma autoantibody ELISA development and validation. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2013; 53(3):433-7. PMC: 3930887. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/ket383. View

Trallero-Araguas E, Labrador-Horrillo M, Selva-OCallaghan A, Martinez M, Martinez-Gomez X, Palou E . Cancer-associated myositis and anti-p155 autoantibody in a series of 85 patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathy. Medicine (Baltimore). 2010; 89(1):47-52. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0b013e3181ca14ff. View

Fiorentino D, Gutierrez-Alamillo L, Hines D, Yang Q, Casciola-Rosen L . Distinct dermatomyositis populations are detected with different autoantibody assay platforms. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2019; 37(6):1048-1051. PMC: 7039699. View

Fujimoto M, Murakami A, Kurei S, Okiyama N, Kawakami A, Mishima M . Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for detection of anti-transcriptional intermediary factor-1 gamma and anti-Mi-2 autoantibodies in dermatomyositis. J Dermatol Sci. 2016; 84(3):272-281. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdermsci.2016.09.013. View

Sheagren J . Staphylococcus aureus. The persistent pathogen (first of two parts). N Engl J Med. 1984; 310(21):1368-73. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM198405243102107. View

Bundell C, Rojana-Udomsart A, Mastaglia F, Hollingsworth P, McLean-Tooke A . Diagnostic performance of a commercial immunoblot assay for myositis antibody testing. Pathology. 2016; 48(4):363-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.pathol.2016.03.012. View

Tiniakou E, Mammen A . Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies and Malignancy: a Comprehensive Review. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol. 2015; 52(1):20-33. DOI: 10.1007/s12016-015-8511-x. View

Shimizu K, Kobayashi T, Kano M, Hamaguchi Y, Takehara K, Matsushita T . Anti-transcriptional intermediary factor 1-γ antibody as a biomarker in patients with dermatomyositis. J Dermatol. 2019; 47(1):64-68. DOI: 10.1111/1346-8138.15128. View

10.

Mahler M, Betteridge Z, Bentow C, Richards M, Seaman A, Chinoy H . Comparison of Three Immunoassays for the Detection of Myositis Specific Antibodies. Front Immunol. 2019; 10:848. PMC: 6503053. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00848. View

11.

Cavazzana I, Fredi M, Ceribelli A, Mordenti C, Ferrari F, Carabellese N . Testing for myositis specific autoantibodies: Comparison between line blot and immunoprecipitation assays in 57 myositis sera. J Immunol Methods. 2016; 433:1-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jim.2016.02.017. View

12.

Fujikawa K, Kawakami A, Kaji K, Fujimoto M, Kawashiri S, Iwamoto N . Association of distinct clinical subsets with myositis-specific autoantibodies towards anti-155/140-kDa polypeptides, anti-140-kDa polypeptides, and anti-aminoacyl tRNA synthetases in Japanese patients with dermatomyositis: a single-centre,.... Scand J Rheumatol. 2009; 38(4):263-7. DOI: 10.1080/03009740802687455. View

13.

Labrador-Horrillo M, Martinez M, Selva-OCallaghan A, Trallero-Araguas E, Balada E, Vilardell-Tarres M . Anti-TIF1γ antibodies (anti-p155) in adult patients with dermatomyositis: comparison of different diagnostic assays. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012; 71(6):993-6. DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2011-200871. View

14.

Targoff I, Mamyrova G, Trieu E, Perurena O, Koneru B, OHanlon T . A novel autoantibody to a 155-kd protein is associated with dermatomyositis. Arthritis Rheum. 2006; 54(11):3682-9. DOI: 10.1002/art.22164. View

15.

Vulsteke J, De Langhe E, Claeys K, Dillaerts D, Poesen K, Lenaerts J . Detection of myositis-specific antibodies. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018; 78(1):e7. DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-212915. View

16.

Tansley S, Li D, Betteridge Z, McHugh N . The reliability of immunoassays to detect autoantibodies in patients with myositis is dependent on autoantibody specificity. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2020; 59(8):2109-2114. PMC: 7382594. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/keaa021. View

17.

Hill C, Zhang Y, Sigurgeirsson B, Pukkala E, Mellemkjaer L, Airio A . Frequency of specific cancer types in dermatomyositis and polymyositis: a population-based study. Lancet. 2001; 357(9250):96-100. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)03540-6. View

18.

Bottai M, Tjarnlund A, Santoni G, Werth V, Pilkington C, de Visser M . EULAR/ACR classification criteria for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies and their major subgroups: a methodology report. RMD Open. 2017; 3(2):e000507. PMC: 5687535. DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2017-000507. View

19.

Pinal-Fernandez I, Ferrer-Fabregas B, Trallero-Araguas E, Balada E, Martinez M, Milisenda J . Tumour TIF1 mutations and loss of heterozygosity related to cancer-associated myositis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2017; 57(2):388-396. PMC: 5850766. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/kex413. View

20.

Kaji K, Fujimoto M, Hasegawa M, Kondo M, Saito Y, Komura K . Identification of a novel autoantibody reactive with 155 and 140 kDa nuclear proteins in patients with dermatomyositis: an association with malignancy. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006; 46(1):25-8. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/kel161. View