Anti-ENA profiles related with anti-SS-A/Ro. The detection of Ro52 and Ro60 according to the presence of SS-B/La, and ANA pattern and titer

González, Delia Almeida; Rodríguez, C. Casañas; Armas, L. Magdalena; Varela, Alfredo Roces; Rodríguez, I. Marcelino; Duarte, M. Troche; León, Antonio Cabrera de

doi:10.1016/j.imlet.2014.04.009

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Biologically, cytoplasmic fluorescence was more frequent in patients with isolated Ro52 Ab, as found by other teams (31, 32). This could be due to the fact that TRIM21 steady-state subcellular localization is cytoplasmic and becomes nuclear only under pro-inflammatory stimuli (interferon α) (4, 33, 34).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Diagnostic Utility of Separate Anti-Ro60 and Anti-Ro52/TRIM21 Antibody Detection in Autoimmune Diseases

Robbins¹,

Hentzien²,

Toquet³

et al. 2019

Front. Immunol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anti-SS-A antibodies are often sought for in autoimmune diseases diagnosis. Two different target proteins have actually been identified: Ro52 and Ro60. Clinical and immunological associations seem different depending on anti-Ro52 or anti-Ro60 antibodies presence. However, due to a heterogeneous presentation in the literature, some immunology laboratories in France have stopped providing anti-Ro52 antibody findings. We report here a new hospital study designed to determine the diagnostic utility of the separate detection of anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 antibodies. We conducted a retrospective, observational study, including every adult patient with positive antinuclear antibodies (ANA) tested in our immunology laboratory, and associated with anti-Ro52 and/or anti-Ro60 antibodies, between 2011 and 2014. Out of 13032 sera tested for ANA, 399 adults had antibodies to Ro52 and/or Ro60; 81.7% were female, with a mean age of 54.5 ± 17.0 years. Anti-Ro52 antibodies were found in 75.7% of the patients and anti-Ro60 antibodies in 56.9%. Among them, 43.1% were classified in the Ro52 + Ro60- group, 32.6% in the Ro52 + Ro60 + group and 24.3% in the Ro52-Ro60+ group. In the Ro52-Ro60+ group, systemic lupus was the most frequent diagnosis (48.5%), with a possible association with antiphospholipid antibodies (anti-cardiolipin antibodies: OR 2.5 (CI95 [1.0–5.0], p = 0.05) and lupus anticoagulant {OR 3.6 (CI95 [1.10–10.0] p = 0.02)}. In the Ro52+Ro60+, primary Sjögren Syndrome was the most likely (OR 4.2 95% CI [2.1–8.3] p < 10−4), especially in patients Ro52+Ro60+La+. Patients with isolated anti-Ro52 had a wider variety of diseases associated, but among auto-immune diseases they were more prone to inflammatory myositis (OR 10.5 [1.4–81.7], p = 0.02) and inflammatory rheumatism (OR 4.6 [1.6–13.8], p = 0.006) in contrast to systemic lupus (OR 0.2 [0.1–0.3], p < 10−4) or primary Sjögren's syndrome (OR 0.1 [0.06–0.2], p < 10−4). We therefore suggest that, when anti-ENA antibodies are prescribed, it should include separate anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 antibodies determination. To go even further, we would like to suggest a change in ENA nomenclature to avoid confusion, abandoning the anti-SS-A label in favor of the anti-Ro52/TRIM21 or anti-Ro60 antibody for a clearer designation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Diagnostic Utility of Separate Anti-Ro60 and Anti-Ro52/TRIM21 Antibody Detection in Autoimmune Diseases

Robbins¹,

Hentzien²,

Toquet³

et al. 2019

Front. Immunol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[6, 11,12,14]. On the other hand, González DA, et al, have reported a range of nuclear patterns in sera with anti SSA, anti-SSB, and Ro 52 positivity [15]. Rodríguez-Orozco, A.R et al [16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Historically, these antibodies were called anti-extractable nuclear antigens and were available with limited panels. Recently various extended panels have become available including novel ANA-speci c antibodies with various clinical relevance [15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

ANA-specific antibodies, ANA patterns, anti-ds-DNA results, and clinical diagnosis: a laboratory and clinical audit

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The diagnosis of systemic autoimmune diseases (SAID) is challenging, due to overlapping features with other non-immune disorders. Antinuclear antibodies (ANA) /anti-cellular antibodies are the sensitive screening tests but anti-double-stranded-deoxyribonucleic acid-antibody (anti-ds-DNA), and ANA-speci c antibodies are speci c for SAID. We aimed to look at ANA-speci c antibodies in our patients and correlated them with ANA patterns, anti-ds-DNA, and clinical diagnosis for proper interpretation and better patient management cost-effectively.Methods: A retrospective data analysis of 641 patients was done (1st February 2019 to 31st -July-2021) who were tested for ANA-speci c antibodies at

show abstract

“…[6, 11,12,14]. On the other hand, González DA, et al, have reported a range of nuclear patterns in sera with anti SSA, anti-SSB, and Ro 52 positivity [15]. We correlated anti-ENA antibodies with ANA patterns in our cohort in order to specify follow-up anti-ENA test cost effectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Anti-ENA Antibodies, ANA Patterns, Anti-ds DNA results, and Clinical Diagnosis: A Laboratory and Clinical Audit.

Anis

Fatima

Jabbar

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The diagnosis of autoimmune diseases (AID) is challenging, due to overlapping features with other non-immune disorders. Anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA) /anti-cellular antibodies are the sensitive screening tests but anti-double-stranded-deoxyribonucleic-acid-antibody (anti-ds-DNA), and anti-extractable nuclear antigens (anti-ENA) are specific for AIDs. We aimed to look at anti-ENA in our patients and correlated them with ANA patterns, anti-ds-DNA and clinical diagnosis for proper interpretation and better patient management cost-effectively. Methods:A retrospective data analysis of 654 patients was done (1st-February-2019 to 31st –July-2021) who were tested for anti-ENA at the Immunology Department of Indus Hospital and Health Network. ANA and anti-ds-DNA results and clinical diagnosis were also analyzed for anti-ENA-positive patients. The statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS 24.0, P < 0.05.was considered statistically significant.Results:Anti-ENA was positive for at least one autoantibody in 245 (38.2%). ANA was positive in 97% of these patients (P=0.000) with speckled and homogenous as most predominant ANA patterns (63% and 33% respectively). Anti-SSA was the most common anti-ENA (n=50%) followed by anti-histones (23%), anti-Sm/RNP (26%), anti-nucleosome (22%). Among ANA-negative patients, anti-SSA was most common (n=5). Anti-ds-DNA was found in 66% of SLE patients. 14% of patients did not have a confirmed diagnosis before anti-ENA testing.Conclusions: Anti-ENA, ANA, and anti-ds-DNA antibodies are essential for AID diagnosis. However, their testing repertoire should follow an algorithm comprising of clinical features, followed by ANA results with nuclear, mitotic, and cytoplasmic patterns, anti-ENA, and anti-ds-DNA for a more meaningful, and cost-effective diagnostic approach.

show abstract

Anti-ENA profiles related with anti-SS-A/Ro. The detection of Ro52 and Ro60 according to the presence of SS-B/La, and ANA pattern and titer

Cited by 6 publications

References 35 publications

Diagnostic Utility of Separate Anti-Ro60 and Anti-Ro52/TRIM21 Antibody Detection in Autoimmune Diseases

Diagnostic Utility of Separate Anti-Ro60 and Anti-Ro52/TRIM21 Antibody Detection in Autoimmune Diseases

ANA-specific antibodies, ANA patterns, anti-ds-DNA results, and clinical diagnosis: a laboratory and clinical audit

Anti-ENA Antibodies, ANA Patterns, Anti-ds DNA results, and Clinical Diagnosis: A Laboratory and Clinical Audit.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About