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

Other authors

Institut Català de la Salut

[Mariscal A, Baucells A, Martínez MA] Immunology Department, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain. [Milán M, Guillen AG] Rheumatology Department, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain. [Trallero-Araguás E] Unitat de Reumatologia, Vall d’Hebron Hospital Universitari, Barcelona, Spain. [Alvarado-Cardenas M] Servei de Medicina Interna, Vall d’Hebron Hospital Universitari, Barcelona, Spain. [Sanz-Martínez MT, Viñas-Giménez L] Servei d’Immunologia, Vall d’Hebron Hospital Universitari, Barcelona, Spain. [Selva-O'Callaghan A] Servei de Medicina Interna, Vall d’Hebron Hospital Universitari, Barcelona, Spain. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain

Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus

Publication date

2022-01-24T14:22:29Z

2022-01-24T14:22:29Z

2021-02-01



Abstract

Càncer; Dermatomiositis; Immunoassaig


Cáncer; Dermatomiositis; Inmunoensayo


Cancer; Dermatomyositis; Immunoassay


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

Document Type

Article


Published version

Language

English

Publisher

Frontiers Media

Related items

Frontiers in Immunology;11

https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.625896

Recommended citation

This citation was generated automatically.

Rights

Attribution 4.0 International

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This item appears in the following Collection(s)