C M Van Campenhout, K A Van Cotthem, W J Stevens, L S De Clerck
{"title":"Performance of automated measurement of antibodies to cyclic citrullinated peptide in the routine clinical laboratory.","authors":"C M Van Campenhout, K A Van Cotthem, W J Stevens, L S De Clerck","doi":"10.1080/00365510701408582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the performing technical and clinical characteristics of an automated system for routine measurement of anticyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies (aCCP), a new marker for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Reproducibility, repeatability and linearity of aCCP, as measured by an automated fluorescent enzyme immunoassay (FEIA/Phadia), were evaluated and compared with the performance of a manual ELISA technique (Axis Shield Diagnostics). Clinical verification of both methods included estimation of sensitivity in RA patients (n = 42) and specificity in well-characterized non-RA autoimmune disease controls (n = 49) and healthy subjects (n = 39).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Precision studies showed a coefficient of variation between 4.9 % and 10 % for the FEIA technique and between 6.35% and 19% for the ELISA technique. Both systems showed good linear response. Sensitivity of aCCP for RA was 74% for FEIA and 79% for ELISA. Specificity was 100% for both methods, as calculated for healthy subjects. For non-RA-diseased controls, specificities of 98% and 94% were obtained for FEIA and ELISA, respectively. Both methods were concordant in 97% of cases. Increasing the cut-off for the ELISA system from >5 U/mL to >11 U/mL resulted in lower sensitivity (71.4%) but higher specificity (98.0%), i.e. improved discriminating power between RA and non-RA and 100% agreement between both methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Automated FEIA measurement of aCCP in the routine clinical laboratory improves imprecision compared to the manual ELISA. Our preliminary results suggest that an increase in cut-off for the ELISA can improve specificity to RA from 94% to 98 %.</p>","PeriodicalId":501634,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation","volume":" ","pages":"859-67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00365510701408582","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00365510701408582","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the performing technical and clinical characteristics of an automated system for routine measurement of anticyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies (aCCP), a new marker for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
Material and methods: Reproducibility, repeatability and linearity of aCCP, as measured by an automated fluorescent enzyme immunoassay (FEIA/Phadia), were evaluated and compared with the performance of a manual ELISA technique (Axis Shield Diagnostics). Clinical verification of both methods included estimation of sensitivity in RA patients (n = 42) and specificity in well-characterized non-RA autoimmune disease controls (n = 49) and healthy subjects (n = 39).
Results: Precision studies showed a coefficient of variation between 4.9 % and 10 % for the FEIA technique and between 6.35% and 19% for the ELISA technique. Both systems showed good linear response. Sensitivity of aCCP for RA was 74% for FEIA and 79% for ELISA. Specificity was 100% for both methods, as calculated for healthy subjects. For non-RA-diseased controls, specificities of 98% and 94% were obtained for FEIA and ELISA, respectively. Both methods were concordant in 97% of cases. Increasing the cut-off for the ELISA system from >5 U/mL to >11 U/mL resulted in lower sensitivity (71.4%) but higher specificity (98.0%), i.e. improved discriminating power between RA and non-RA and 100% agreement between both methods.
Conclusion: Automated FEIA measurement of aCCP in the routine clinical laboratory improves imprecision compared to the manual ELISA. Our preliminary results suggest that an increase in cut-off for the ELISA can improve specificity to RA from 94% to 98 %.