Journal of neuromuscular diseases · 2024
Detection of Autoantibodies Against the Acetylcholine Receptor, Evaluation of Commercially Available Methodologies: Fixed Cell-Based Assay, Radioimmunoprecipitation Assay and Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay1.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Diogenes Larissa, Dellavance Alessandra, Baldo Danielle Cristiane, Gozzi-Silva Sarah Cristina, Gomes Kethellen, Prado Monica Simon, Andrade Luis Eduardo C, Keppeke Gerson Dierley
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Myasthenia Gravis (MG) is an autoimmune disorder characterized by pathogenic autoantibodies (AAbs) targeting nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (AChR), disrupting neuromuscular communication. RadioImmunoPrecipitation Assay (RIPA) is recommended to detect AChR AAbs, but its complexity and radioactive requirements limit widespread use. We compare non-RIPA anti-AChR immunoassays, including Cell-Based Assay (CBA) and two ELISA kits, against the gold standard RIPA.
METHODS/RESULTS: 145 samples were included with medical indication for anti-AChR testing. By the RIPA method, 63 were negative (RIPA-Neg < 0.02 nmol/L), 18 were classified as Borderline (≥0.02 -1 nmol/L), and 64 were positive (RIPA-Pos > 1 nmol/L). The competitive ELISA showed poor agreement with RIPA (Kappa = 0.216). The indirect ELISA demonstrated substantial agreement with RIPA (Kappa = 0.652), with ∼76% sensitivity and ∼94% specificity for MG diagnostic. The CBA, where fixed cells expressing clustered AChR were used as substrate, exhibited almost perfect agreement with RIPA (Kappa = 0.984), yielding ∼98% sensitivity and 96% specificity for MG. In addition, a semiquantitative analysis showed a strong correlation between CBA titration, indirect ELISA, and RIPA levels (r = 0.793 and r = 0.789, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The CBA displayed excellent analytical performance for MG diagnostic when compared to RIPA, making it a potential replacement for RIPA in clinical laboratories. Some solid-phase assays (such as the indirect ELISA applied here), as well as CBA titration, offer reliable options to estimate anti-AChR AAb levels after confirming positivity by the CBA.∥.
METHODS/RESULTS: 145 samples were included with medical indication for anti-AChR testing. By the RIPA method, 63 were negative (RIPA-Neg < 0.02 nmol/L), 18 were classified as Borderline (≥0.02 -1 nmol/L), and 64 were positive (RIPA-Pos > 1 nmol/L). The competitive ELISA showed poor agreement with RIPA (Kappa = 0.216). The indirect ELISA demonstrated substantial agreement with RIPA (Kappa = 0.652), with ∼76% sensitivity and ∼94% specificity for MG diagnostic. The CBA, where fixed cells expressing clustered AChR were used as substrate, exhibited almost perfect agreement with RIPA (Kappa = 0.984), yielding ∼98% sensitivity and 96% specificity for MG. In addition, a semiquantitative analysis showed a strong correlation between CBA titration, indirect ELISA, and RIPA levels (r = 0.793 and r = 0.789, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The CBA displayed excellent analytical performance for MG diagnostic when compared to RIPA, making it a potential replacement for RIPA in clinical laboratories. Some solid-phase assays (such as the indirect ELISA applied here), as well as CBA titration, offer reliable options to estimate anti-AChR AAb levels after confirming positivity by the CBA.∥.