Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Autoantibodies in Rheumatoid Arthritis – Laboratory and Clinical Perspectives

Rönnelid, Johan ; Turesson, Carl LU and Kastbom, Alf (2021) In Frontiers in Immunology 12.
Abstract

Measurement of two groups of autoantibodies, rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-citrullinated protein/peptide antibodies (ACPA) have gained increasing significance in the diagnosis and classification of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over the last 65 years. Despite this rising importance of autoimmune serology in RA, there is a palpable lack of harmonization between different commercial RF and ACPA tests. While a minimal diagnostic specificity has been defined for RF tests, which almost always are related to an international reference preparation, neither of this applies to ACPA. Especially assays with low diagnostic specificity are associated with very low positive predictive values or post-test probabilities in real world settings. In this... (More)

Measurement of two groups of autoantibodies, rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-citrullinated protein/peptide antibodies (ACPA) have gained increasing significance in the diagnosis and classification of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over the last 65 years. Despite this rising importance of autoimmune serology in RA, there is a palpable lack of harmonization between different commercial RF and ACPA tests. While a minimal diagnostic specificity has been defined for RF tests, which almost always are related to an international reference preparation, neither of this applies to ACPA. Especially assays with low diagnostic specificity are associated with very low positive predictive values or post-test probabilities in real world settings. In this review we focus on issues of practical bearing for the clinical physician diagnosing patients who potentially have RA, or treating patients diagnosed with RA. We advocate that all clinically used assays for RF and ACPA should be aligned to a common diagnostic specificity of 98-99% compared to healthy controls. This high and rather narrow interval corresponds to the diagnostic specificity seen for many commercial ACPA tests, and represents a specificity that is higher than what is customary for most RF assays. Data on antibody occurrence harmonized in this way should be accompanied by test result-specific likelihood ratios for the target diagnosis RA on an ordinal or interval scale, which will provide the clinical physician with more granular and richer information than merely relating numerical values to a single cut-off point. As many physicians today are used to evaluate autoantibodies as positive or negative on a nominal scale, the introduction of test result-specific likelihood ratios will require a change in clinical mindset. We also discuss the use of autoantibodies to prognosticate future arthritis development in at-risk patients as well as predict severe disease course and outcome of pharmacological treatment.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; and
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
ACPA, anti-CCP, diagnosis, prognosis, rheumatoid arthritis, rheumatoid factor
in
Frontiers in Immunology
volume
12
article number
685312
publisher
Frontiers Media S. A.
external identifiers
  • pmid:34054878
  • scopus:85107251698
ISSN
1664-3224
DOI
10.3389/fimmu.2021.685312
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
721cba79-68f0-4b4a-8306-287fc441ad9e
date added to LUP
2021-06-24 10:28:48
date last changed
2024-06-16 15:27:01
@article{721cba79-68f0-4b4a-8306-287fc441ad9e,
  abstract     = {{<p>Measurement of two groups of autoantibodies, rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-citrullinated protein/peptide antibodies (ACPA) have gained increasing significance in the diagnosis and classification of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over the last 65 years. Despite this rising importance of autoimmune serology in RA, there is a palpable lack of harmonization between different commercial RF and ACPA tests. While a minimal diagnostic specificity has been defined for RF tests, which almost always are related to an international reference preparation, neither of this applies to ACPA. Especially assays with low diagnostic specificity are associated with very low positive predictive values or post-test probabilities in real world settings. In this review we focus on issues of practical bearing for the clinical physician diagnosing patients who potentially have RA, or treating patients diagnosed with RA. We advocate that all clinically used assays for RF and ACPA should be aligned to a common diagnostic specificity of 98-99% compared to healthy controls. This high and rather narrow interval corresponds to the diagnostic specificity seen for many commercial ACPA tests, and represents a specificity that is higher than what is customary for most RF assays. Data on antibody occurrence harmonized in this way should be accompanied by test result-specific likelihood ratios for the target diagnosis RA on an ordinal or interval scale, which will provide the clinical physician with more granular and richer information than merely relating numerical values to a single cut-off point. As many physicians today are used to evaluate autoantibodies as positive or negative on a nominal scale, the introduction of test result-specific likelihood ratios will require a change in clinical mindset. We also discuss the use of autoantibodies to prognosticate future arthritis development in at-risk patients as well as predict severe disease course and outcome of pharmacological treatment.</p>}},
  author       = {{Rönnelid, Johan and Turesson, Carl and Kastbom, Alf}},
  issn         = {{1664-3224}},
  keywords     = {{ACPA; anti-CCP; diagnosis; prognosis; rheumatoid arthritis; rheumatoid factor}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  month        = {{05}},
  publisher    = {{Frontiers Media S. A.}},
  series       = {{Frontiers in Immunology}},
  title        = {{Autoantibodies in Rheumatoid Arthritis – Laboratory and Clinical Perspectives}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2021.685312}},
  doi          = {{10.3389/fimmu.2021.685312}},
  volume       = {{12}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}