Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Nov 23;11(1):17.
doi: 10.1186/s13317-020-00139-9.

Current laboratory and clinical practices in reporting and interpreting anti-nuclear antibody indirect immunofluorescence (ANA IIF) patterns: results of an international survey

Lieve Van Hoovels  1   2 , Sylvia Broeders  3 , Edward K L Chan  4 , Luis Andrade  5 , Wilson de Melo Cruvinel  6 , Jan Damoiseaux  7 , Markku Viander  8 , Manfred Herold  9 , Wim Coucke  3 , Ingmar Heijnen  10 , Dimitrios Bogdanos  11 , Jaime Calvo-Alén  12 , Catharina Eriksson  13 , Ana Kozmar  14 , Liisa Kuhi  15 , Carolien Bonroy  16   17 , Bernard Lauwerys  18   19 , Sofie Schouwers  20 , Laurence Lutteri  21 , Martine Vercammen  22   23 , Miroslav Mayer  24 , Dina Patel  25 , William Egner  25 , Kari Puolakka  26 , Andrea Tesija-Kuna  14 , Yehuda Shoenfeld  27   28 , Maria José Rego de Sousa  29 , Marcos Lopez Hoyos  30 , Antonella Radice  31 , Xavier Bossuyt  32   33
Affiliations

Current laboratory and clinical practices in reporting and interpreting anti-nuclear antibody indirect immunofluorescence (ANA IIF) patterns: results of an international survey

Lieve Van Hoovels et al. Auto Immun Highlights. .

Abstract

Background: The International Consensus on Antinuclear Antibody (ANA) Patterns (ICAP) has recently proposed nomenclature in order to harmonize ANA indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) pattern reporting. ICAP distinguishes competent-level from expert-level patterns. A survey was organized to evaluate reporting, familiarity, and considered clinical value of ANA IIF patterns.

Methods: Two surveys were distributed by European Autoimmunity Standardization Initiative (EASI) working groups, the International Consensus on ANA Patterns (ICAP) and UK NEQAS to laboratory professionals and clinicians.

Results: 438 laboratory professionals and 248 clinicians from 67 countries responded. Except for dense fine speckled (DFS), the nuclear competent patterns were reported by > 85% of the laboratories. Except for rods and rings, the cytoplasmic competent patterns were reported by > 72% of laboratories. Cytoplasmic IIF staining was considered ANA positive by 55% of clinicians and 62% of laboratory professionals, with geographical and expertise-related differences. Quantification of fluorescence intensity was considered clinically relevant for nuclear patterns, but less so for cytoplasmic and mitotic patterns. Combining IIF with specific extractable nuclear antigens (ENA)/dsDNA antibody testing was considered most informative. Of the nuclear competent patterns, the centromere and homogeneous pattern obtained the highest scores for clinical relevance and the DFS pattern the lowest. Of the cytoplasmic patterns, the reticular/mitochondria-like pattern obtained the highest scores for clinical relevance and the polar/Golgi-like and rods and rings patterns the lowest.

Conclusion: This survey confirms that the major nuclear and cytoplasmic ANA IIF patterns are considered clinically important. There is no unanimity on classifying DFS, rods and rings and polar/Golgi-like as a competent pattern and on reporting cytoplasmic patterns as ANA IIF positive.

Keywords: ANA patterns; Antinuclear antibodies; ICAP; Indirect immunofluorescence.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential competing interest.

References

    1. Solomon DH, Kavanaugh AJ, Schur PH, American College of Rheumatology Ad Hoc Committee on Immunologic Testing Guidelines Evidence-based guidelines for the use of immunologic tests: antinuclear antibody testing. Arthritis Rheum. 2002;47:434–444. doi: 10.1002/art.10561. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Meroni PL, Schur PH. ANA screening: an old test with new recommendations. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69:1420–1422. doi: 10.1136/ard.2009.127100. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Aringer M, Costenbader K, Daikh D, Brinks R, Mosca M, Ramsey-Goldman R, et al. 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis. 2019;78:1151–1159. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-214819. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Angeles-Han ST, Ringold S, Beukelman T, Lovell D, Cuello CA, Becker ML, et al. 2019 American College of Rheumatology/Arthritis Foundation guideline for the screening, monitoring, and treatment of juvenile idiopathic Arthritis-Associated Uveitis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2019;71:703–716. doi: 10.1002/acr.23871. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hennes EM, Zeniya M, Czaja AJ, Parés A, Dalekos GN, Krawitt EL, et al. Simplified criteria for the diagnosis of autoimmune hepatitis. Hepatology. 2008;48:169–176. doi: 10.1002/hep.22322. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources