Home
Deutsch
Advanced Search
Browse by ...
Publication overview
Contact persons
Help
Publ. Version/Full Text
DOI
PMC
 |
Open Access Gold |
|
as soon as is submitted to ZB.
Antiphospholipid antibody testing in a maximum care hospital: Method-dependent differences.
J. Clin. Med. 13:4528 (2024)
Background: Antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) testing is critical for the classification of antiphospholipid syndrome. The 2023 ACR/EULAR classification criteria recommend the use of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) and specific thresholds for aPL positivity. Since non-ELISA methods are increasingly used, we compared and evaluated ELISA and non-ELISA aPL assays in a real-world maximum care hospital setting. Methods: Between January 2021 and June 2024, anticardiolipin (aCL; IgG and IgM) and anti-beta2 glycoprotein I (aß2GPI; IgG and IgM) antibodies were measured using ELISA (n = 5115) and a chemiluminescence-based automated immunoassay (CLIA) (n = 3820). Results of parallel testing were compared, and associations with clinical and laboratory characteristics were evaluated. Results: A total of 946 samples were tested using ELISA and CLIA in parallel. A total of 136 (14%) specimens were positive for at least one aPL, and 55 (6%) specimens were from patients diagnosed with APS. Among the latter, 47 (85%) and 41 (75%) patients were positive when ELISA- or CLIA-based aPL assays were used, respectively. After applying the >40 units threshold of the new classification criteria, the number of aPL-positive specimens was significantly lower. In the entire cohort, the agreement between ELISA and CLIA aPL assays was acceptable only for aß2GPI IgG; the results from the two methods did not agree for aCL IgG/IgM and aß2GPI IgM. In APS patients, the agreement between ELISA and CLIA aPL assays was acceptable for aß2GPI IgG and IgM but poor for aCL IgG and IgM. Antibody levels in APS patients were significantly higher using CLIA compared to ELISA. Conclusions: The method-dependent discrepancies between ELISA- and CLIA-based aPL assays regarding the quantitative and qualitative results are substantial. Both methods are suitable for APS classification, but the choice of aPL assay may influence the classification, and therefore, aPL results should be interpreted carefully in the clinical context.
Altmetric
Additional Metrics?
Edit extra informations
Login
Publication type
Article: Journal article
Document type
Scientific Article
Keywords
Anti-beta2 Glycoprotein I Antibodies ; Antibody Assay ; Anticardiolipin Antibodies ; Antiphospholipid Syndrome; International Consensus Statement; Classification Criteria; Anticardiolipin; Update
ISSN (print) / ISBN
2077-0383
e-ISSN
2077-0383
Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Quellenangaben
Volume: 13,
Issue: 15,
Article Number: 4528
Publisher
MDPI
Publishing Place
Basel
Non-patent literature
Publications
Reviewing status
Peer reviewed