IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0220033.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of a novel line immunoassay for the detection of criteria and non-criteria antiphospholipid antibodies in comparison to established ELISAs

Author

Listed:
  • Markus A Thaler
  • Andreas Bietenbeck
  • Udo Steigerwald
  • Thomas Büttner
  • Peter Schierack
  • Edelgard Lindhoff-Last
  • Dirk Roggenbuck
  • Peter B Luppa

Abstract

Background: Persistent antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) constitute the serological hallmark of the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). Recently, various new assay technologies for the detection of aPL better suited to multiplex reaction environments than ELISAs emerged. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of such a novel line immunoassay (LIA) for the simultaneous detection of 10 different aPL. Methods: Fifty-three APS patients and 34 healthy controls were investigated for criteria (antibodies against cardiolipin [aCL], β2-glycoprotein I [aβ2-GPI]) and non-criteria aPL (antibodies against phosphatidic acid [aPA], phosphatidyl-choline [aPC], -ethanolamine [aPE], -glycerol [aPG], -inositol [aPI], -serine [aPS], annexin V [aAnnV], prothrombin [aPT]) IgG and IgM by LIA. Criteria aPL were additionally determined with the established Alegria (ALE), AcuStar (ACU), UniCap (UNI), and AESKULISA (AES) systems and non-criteria aPL with the AES system. Diagnostic performance was evaluated with a gold standard for criteria aPL derived from the results of the four established assays via latent class analysis and with the clinical diagnosis as gold standard for non-criteria aPL. Results: Assay performance of the LIA for criteria aPL was comparable to that of ALE, ACU, UNI, and AES. For non-criteria aPL, sensitivities of the LIA for aPA-, aPI-, aPS-IgG and aPA-IgM were significantly higher and for aPC-, aPE-, aAnnV-IgG and aPC- and aPE-IgM significantly lower than AES. Specificities did not differ significantly. Conclusions: The LIA constitutes a valuable diagnostic tool for aPL profiling. It offers increased sensitivity for the detection of aPL against anionic phospholipids. In contrast, ELISAs exhibit strengths for the sensitive detection of aPL against neutral phospholipids.

Suggested Citation

  • Markus A Thaler & Andreas Bietenbeck & Udo Steigerwald & Thomas Büttner & Peter Schierack & Edelgard Lindhoff-Last & Dirk Roggenbuck & Peter B Luppa, 2019. "Evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of a novel line immunoassay for the detection of criteria and non-criteria antiphospholipid antibodies in comparison to established ELISAs," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-17, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0220033
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0220033
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0220033&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0220033?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0220033. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.