The Rheumatologist
COVID-19 NewsACR Convergence
  • Connect with us:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • Feed
  • Home
  • Conditions
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • SLE (Lupus)
    • Crystal Arthritis
      • Gout Resource Center
    • Spondyloarthritis
    • Osteoarthritis
    • Soft Tissue Pain
    • Scleroderma
    • Vasculitis
    • Systemic Inflammatory Syndromes
    • Guidelines
  • Resource Centers
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis Resource Center
    • Gout Resource Center
    • Psoriatic Arthritis Resource Center
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis Resource Center
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Resource Center
  • Drug Updates
    • Biologics & Biosimilars
    • DMARDs & Immunosuppressives
    • Topical Drugs
    • Analgesics
    • Safety
    • Pharma Co. News
  • Professional Topics
    • Ethics
    • Legal
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Career Development
      • Certification
      • Education & Training
    • Awards
    • Profiles
    • President’s Perspective
    • Rheuminations
    • Interprofessional Perspective
  • Practice Management
    • Billing/Coding
    • Quality Assurance/Improvement
    • Workforce
    • Facility
    • Patient Perspective
    • Electronic Health Records
    • Apps
    • Information Technology
    • From the College
    • Multimedia
      • Audio
      • Video
  • Resources
    • Issue Archives
    • ACR Convergence
      • Gout Resource Center
      • Axial Spondyloarthritis Resource Center
      • Psoriatic Arthritis
      • Abstracts
      • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence Home
    • American College of Rheumatology
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Research Reviews
    • ACR Journals
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
    • Rheumatology Image Library
    • Treatment Guidelines
    • Rheumatology Research Foundation
    • Events
  • About Us
    • Mission/Vision
    • Meet the Authors
    • Meet the Editors
    • Contribute to The Rheumatologist
    • Subscription
    • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Search
You are here: Home / Articles / Study Finds ANA-Negative Classification Errors Among Newly Diagnosed Lupus Patients

Study Finds ANA-Negative Classification Errors Among Newly Diagnosed Lupus Patients

October 18, 2019 • By Catherine Kolonko

  • Tweet
  • Email
Print-Friendly Version / Save PDF
Jarun Ontakrai / shutterstock.com

Jarun Ontakrai / shutterstock.com

How laboratories define a serological hallmark of systemic lupus erythematous and which assays they use to detect it could contribute to misclassification of patients identified as anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) negative, according to researchers.

You Might Also Like
  • New Study Reveals Limitations in ANA Test Kits for Lupus
  • New Study Works Toward Better Lupus Classification Criteria
  • Newly Diagnosed SLE Patients Have a Greater Risk of Cardiovascular Disease
Explore This Issue
October 2019

Most people who have lupus test positive for ANAs as part of an immunology screening for autoimmune disorders. The presence of ANAs is considered an important lupus classification criterion, but some patients are misclassified because their test results are considered ANA negative, say the authors of a study published recently in Arthritis Care & Research.

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

“ANA positivity is traditionally defined as the presence of an indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) staining pattern localized to the nucleus, while isolated cytoplasmic and mitotic cell patterns (CMPs), although staining positive by IIF, often are not reported or classified as ANA positive and are not included in the ANA test reports by some laboratories,” states the article.

Simply put, not all lupus antibodies display nuclear patterns under IIF staining—a common ANA testing method—and instead can show up as a cytoplasmic pattern, explains lead author May Choi, MD, FRCPC, rheumatology clinical lecturer at the Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, and Alberta Health Services, Canada. This means if a lab is not testing or not reporting cytoplasmic patterns as positive, “they are potentially missing important antibodies,” she says.

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Test results can vary among labs for different reasons, including what types of assays are used, says Dr. Choi. In addition, insurance reimbursement policies may prompt some labs to skip checking for CMPs altogether and only test for nuclear patterns, she says.

The Study

The result of the misclassification is that some patients who actually have lupus may be overlooked and go undiagnosed or may not qualify for clinical trials, says Dr. Choi. To get a better handle on how often this happens, researchers studied the prevalence of IIF anti-cellular antibody staining among patients at inception of lupus, relevant because ANA testing is usually ordered at the beginning, when doctors are trying to make a diagnosis, she says.

“It’s also believed that the ANA can change over the disease course, so we wanted to study patients near the time of diagnosis,” says Dr. Choi.

ad goes here:advert-3
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

The study looked at patients who were considered ANA positive if their lab test showed a nuclear pattern, as well as other patients who had ANA with cytoplasmic and mitotic patterns only.

“We found a small percentage of the patients were CMP positive, and a small percentage of these patients who would have otherwise been called ANA negative,” she says.

Researchers used baseline serum of patients in the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics inception cohort to detect anti-cellular antibodies by IIF on Hep-2000 substrate. The three subsets examined were ANA positive, which showed the presence of either nuclear or mixed nuclear/CMP staining; anti-cellular antibody negative, which lacked intracellular staining; and isolated CMP staining.

All tests from the study were conducted at one central lab, the Mitogen Advanced Diagnostic Laboratory at the University of Calgary.

“We wanted to standardize everything to one location” because of the variability that can exist between centers and different assays, says Dr. Choi.

Study results revealed that out of 1,137 newly diagnosed lupus patients, the majority or 92% (1,049) were ANA positive, according to the article. Among the remaining patients, 6.2% (71) were anti-cellular antibody negative and 1.5% (17) had an isolated CMP.

The findings reveal that given the traditional definition, patients from the latter group would identify as ANA negative, even though they have antibodies directed against a variety of CMP targets, the article states.

“So these patients may have been misclassified as ANA negative,” says Dr. Choi.

Pages: 1 2 3 | Single Page

Filed Under: Conditions, Research Reviews, SLE (Lupus) Tagged With: ANA test, antinuclear antibodies, labsIssue: October 2019

You Might Also Like:
  • New Study Reveals Limitations in ANA Test Kits for Lupus
  • New Study Works Toward Better Lupus Classification Criteria
  • Newly Diagnosed SLE Patients Have a Greater Risk of Cardiovascular Disease
  • The Value of Repeat Antibody Testing in Lupus Patients

Simple Tasks

Learn more about the ACR’s public awareness campaign and how you can get involved. Help increase visibility of rheumatic diseases and decrease the number of people left untreated.

Visit the Simple Tasks site »

American College of Rheumatology

Visit the official website for the American College of Rheumatology.

Visit the ACR »

Meeting Abstracts

Browse and search abstracts from the ACR Convergence and ACR/ARP Annual Meetings going back to 2012.

Visit the Abstracts site »

The Rheumatologist newsmagazine reports on issues and trends in the management and treatment of rheumatic diseases. The Rheumatologist reaches 11,500 rheumatologists, internists, orthopedic surgeons, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, nurses, and other healthcare professionals who practice, research, or teach in the field of rheumatology.

About Us / Contact Us / Advertise / Privacy Policy / Terms of Use / Cookie Preferences

  • Connect with us:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • Feed

Copyright © 2006–2023 American College of Rheumatology. All rights reserved.

ISSN 1931-3268 (print)
ISSN 1931-3209 (online)