Maria Infantino, Mariangela Manfredi, Emirena Garrafa, Silvia Pancani, Anastasia Lechiara, Emanuela Maria Mobilia, Valentina Grossi, Barbara Lari, Nicola Bizzaro, Giampaola Pesce
{"title":"A comparison of current methods to measure antibodies in type 1 diabetes.","authors":"Maria Infantino, Mariangela Manfredi, Emirena Garrafa, Silvia Pancani, Anastasia Lechiara, Emanuela Maria Mobilia, Valentina Grossi, Barbara Lari, Nicola Bizzaro, Giampaola Pesce","doi":"10.1515/cclm-2025-0238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic autoimmune disease causing β-cell destruction, hyperglycemia, and lifelong insulin dependence that can lead to severe complications like ketoacidosis, with a 1 % mortality rate in newly diagnosed patients. A significant breakthrough in T1D research was the identification of a long presymptomatic phase, characterized by disease-specific autoantibodies despite the absence of clinical symptoms. The aim of our study was to compare the results of different commercial assays for detecting anti-GAD, -IA-2, -ZnT8 antibodies and IAA to evaluate the state of the art of the current methods in a routine clinical laboratory setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We have analyzed 87 consecutive samples from patients screened for T1D and evaluated the agreement among four commercial assays (two chemiluminescence immunoassays and two immunoenzymatic assays) for detecting anti-GAD, -IA-2, -ZnT8 antibodies and IAA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The agreement among methods for all disease-specific antibodies measured by Cohen's kappa ranged from 0.514 to 1.000. The highest agreement was found for anti-GAD antibodies (0.923-0.963) and the lowest agreement for IAA (0.514-0.550). The average agreement was 0.796 (SD: 0.170) and it was statistically significant at p<0.001 for all comparisons.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Even though some differences exist among methods, our findings provide valuable insights into the use of new technologies for T1D diagnosis, demonstrating an overall consistent agreement among assays tested for all antibodies but IAA.</p>","PeriodicalId":10390,"journal":{"name":"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2025-0238","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic autoimmune disease causing β-cell destruction, hyperglycemia, and lifelong insulin dependence that can lead to severe complications like ketoacidosis, with a 1 % mortality rate in newly diagnosed patients. A significant breakthrough in T1D research was the identification of a long presymptomatic phase, characterized by disease-specific autoantibodies despite the absence of clinical symptoms. The aim of our study was to compare the results of different commercial assays for detecting anti-GAD, -IA-2, -ZnT8 antibodies and IAA to evaluate the state of the art of the current methods in a routine clinical laboratory setting.
Methods: We have analyzed 87 consecutive samples from patients screened for T1D and evaluated the agreement among four commercial assays (two chemiluminescence immunoassays and two immunoenzymatic assays) for detecting anti-GAD, -IA-2, -ZnT8 antibodies and IAA.
Results: The agreement among methods for all disease-specific antibodies measured by Cohen's kappa ranged from 0.514 to 1.000. The highest agreement was found for anti-GAD antibodies (0.923-0.963) and the lowest agreement for IAA (0.514-0.550). The average agreement was 0.796 (SD: 0.170) and it was statistically significant at p<0.001 for all comparisons.
Conclusions: Even though some differences exist among methods, our findings provide valuable insights into the use of new technologies for T1D diagnosis, demonstrating an overall consistent agreement among assays tested for all antibodies but IAA.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) publishes articles on novel teaching and training methods applicable to laboratory medicine. CCLM welcomes contributions on the progress in fundamental and applied research and cutting-edge clinical laboratory medicine. It is one of the leading journals in the field, with an impact factor over 3. CCLM is issued monthly, and it is published in print and electronically.
CCLM is the official journal of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) and publishes regularly EFLM recommendations and news. CCLM is the official journal of the National Societies from Austria (ÖGLMKC); Belgium (RBSLM); Germany (DGKL); Hungary (MLDT); Ireland (ACBI); Italy (SIBioC); Portugal (SPML); and Slovenia (SZKK); and it is affiliated to AACB (Australia) and SFBC (France).
Topics:
- clinical biochemistry
- clinical genomics and molecular biology
- clinical haematology and coagulation
- clinical immunology and autoimmunity
- clinical microbiology
- drug monitoring and analysis
- evaluation of diagnostic biomarkers
- disease-oriented topics (cardiovascular disease, cancer diagnostics, diabetes)
- new reagents, instrumentation and technologies
- new methodologies
- reference materials and methods
- reference values and decision limits
- quality and safety in laboratory medicine
- translational laboratory medicine
- clinical metrology
Follow @cclm_degruyter on Twitter!