The BioPlex 2200 ANA Screen is a fully automated system that determines levels for 13 different autoimmune antibodies of established clinical significance. The objective of this study was to determine the specificity of the BioPlex 2200 ANA Screen assay and to analyze the antibody profile samples collected from healthy subjects against comparative ELISA and IIF screening methods. A total of 510 specimens were randomly selected from a cohort of apparently healthy blood bank donors. Samples were distributed to five age brackets. All samples were tested using Bio-Rad's ANA Screen kit. Specificity was compared to IIF and ELISA results. Most of the samples were found negative in all ANA screening systems (84.5% by IIF, 92.5% by BioPlex 2200 ANA Screen kit, and 94.5% by ELISA). The frequency of positive results was highest (15.5%) using IIF, in comparison to almost similar results (5.5% vs. 7.5%) achieved by ANA ELISA and BioPlex 2200 ANA Screen kits. The positive rate of autoantibodies was significantly reduced when analyzed by different combinations of ANA screen assays (from 2.35% using IIF + BioPlex ANA Screen tests to 0.98% by using all three tests). Using the BioPlex 2200 ANA Screen system, we were able to identify samples with high levels of individual antibodies: anti-dsDNA at 20-63 IU/mL, antichromatin at 4-8 AI, anti-SmRNP at 2-6 AI, and anti-RNPA at 2-4.5 AI. Importantly, from 7 IIF and ELISA positive sera, 5 of these were also BioPlex 2200 positive, suggesting that the BioPlex is seeing the samples that are of the greatest interest, using the established techniques. The specificity of the BioPlex 2200 ANA Screen analysis of 13 different analytes (dsDNA, centromere B, chromatin, Jo1, ribosomal P, RNP 68, RNP A, Scl-70, Sm, SmPNP, SS-A52, SS-A60, SS-B) is comparable (P < 0.252) to the ELISA ANA screening test. Like the ELISA, the BioPlex 2200 has a lower (P < 0.001) positive rate than IIF for the autoantibody screening.

IntroductionA hallmark of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the development of autoantibodies targeting proteins that contain citrulline. Anticitrullinated protein antibodies (ACPAs) are currently detected by the commercial cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP) assay, which uses a mix of cyclised citrullinated peptides as an artificial mimic of the true antigen(s). To increase the sensitivity of ACPA detection and dissect ACPA specificities, we developed a multiplex assay that profiles ACPAs by measuring their reactivity to the citrullinated peptides and proteins derived from RA joint tissue.MethodsWe created a bead-based, citrullinated antigen array to profile ACPAs. This custom array contains 16 citrullinated peptides and proteins detected in RA synovial tissues. We used the array to profile ACPAs in sera from a cohort of patients with RA and other non-inflammatory arthritides, as well as sera from an independent cohort of RA patients for whom data were available on carriage of HLA-DRB1 ‘shared epitope’ (SE) alleles and history of cigarette smoking.ResultsOur multiplex assay showed that at least 10% of RA patients who tested negative in the commercial CCP assay possessed ACPAs. Carriage of HLA-DRB1 SE alleles and a history of cigarette smoking were associated with an increase in ACPA reactivity—in anti-CCP+ RA and in a subset of anti-CCP− RA.ConclusionsOur multiplex assay can identify ACPA-positive RA patients missed by the commercial CCP assay, thus enabling greater diagnostic sensitivity. Further, our findings suggest that cigarette smoking and possession of HLA-DRB1 SE alleles contribute to the development of ACPAs in anti-CCP− RA.

iThe current standard for laboratory diagnosis of Lyme disease in the United States is serologic detection of antibodies against Borrelia burgdorferi. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends a two-tiered testing algorithm; however, this scheme has limited sensitivity for detecting early Lyme disease. Thus, there is a need to improve diagnostics for Lyme disease at the early stage, when antibiotic treatment is highly efficacious. We examined novel and established antigen markers to develop a multiplex panel that identifies early infection using the combined sensitivity of multiple markers while simultaneously maintaining high specificity by requiring positive results for two markers to designate a positive test. Ten markers were selected from our initial analysis of 62 B. burgdorferi surface proteins and synthetic peptides by assessing binding of IgG and IgM to each in a training set of Lyme disease patient samples and controls. In a validation set, this 10-antigen panel identified a higher proportion of early-Lyme-disease patients as positive at the baseline or posttreatment visit than two-tiered testing (87.5% and 67.5%, respectively; P < 0.05). Equivalent specificities of 100% were observed in 26 healthy controls. Upon further analysis, positivity on the novel 10-antigen panel was associated with longer illness duration and multiple erythema migrans. The improved sensitivity and comparable specificity of our 10-antigen panel compared to two-tiered testing in detecting early B. burgdorferi infection indicates that multiplex analysis, featuring the next generation of markers, could advance diagnostic technology to better aid clinicians in diagnosing and treating early Lyme disease.

Autoantibody testing is performed to help diagnose patients who have clinical symptoms suggestive of possible autoimmune diseases. Antinuclear antibodies (ANA) are present in many systemic autoimmune conditions such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). However, a positive ANA test may also be seen with non-autoimmune inflammatory diseases, including both acute and chronic infections. When the ANA test is used as an initial screen in patients with non-specific clinical symptoms, such as fever, joint pain, myalgias, fatigue, rash, or anemia, the likelihood of a positive result due to infection will increase, especially in children. This article identifies acute and chronic infectious diseases that are likely to produce a positive ANA result and summarizes recent literature addressing both the causes and consequences of these findings.

Measurement of multiple antibodies has been possible for years using labor-intensive methods such as counterimmunoelectrophoresis and radioimmunoprecipitation. Recently, simpler methods that are more practical for routine analysis, often described as multiplex technologies, have been introduced. One common technique, the line assay, uses nitrocellulose strips that are precoated at different locations with more than a dozen recombinant proteins or peptides. Detection of results may be performed visually or with scanning instrumentation. A second technique uses families of polystyrene beads that are dyed to establish a unique identity; each bead type is then coated with a specific affinity-purified or recombinant protein. Detection is performed by flow cytometry. There have been multiple descriptions of the use of these techniques for measuring antibodies associated with the antinuclear antibody screen. More recent reports describe applications to antibodies associated with hypothyroidism, ANCA, anti-phospholipid syndrome, and celiac disease. This review summarizes the work that has been performed to date and examines the potential benefits of multiplexing to both the laboratory and the physician.