Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Porcelli, Brunetta
• d’Alessandro, Miriana
• Gupta, Latika
• Grazzini, Silvia
• Volpi, Nila
• Bacarelli, Maria Romana
• Ginanneschi, Federica
• Biasi, Giovanni
• Bellisai, Francesca
• Fabbroni, Marta
• Bennett, David
• Fabiani, Claudia
• Cantarini, Luca
• Bargagli, Elena
• Frediani, Bruno
• Conticini, Edoardo

Titel

Anti-Cytosolic 5#8242;-Nucleotidase 1A in the Diagnosis of Patients with Suspected Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies: An Italian Real-Life, Single-Centre Retrospective Study

Ist Teil von

• Biomedicines, 2023-07, Vol.11 (7)

Ort / Verlag

MDPI AG

Erscheinungsjahr

2023

Quelle

EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Background: Anti-cytosolic 5′-nucleotidase 1A (anti-cN1A) antibodies were proposed as a biomarker for the diagnosis of inclusion body myositis (IBM), but conflicting specificity and sensitivity evidence limits its use. Our study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of anti-cN1A in a cohort of patients who underwent a myositis line immunoassay for suspected idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM). We also assessed the agreement between two testing procedures: line immunoassay (LIA) and enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA). Materials and methods: We collected retrospective clinical and serological data for 340 patients who underwent a myositis antibody assay using LIA (EUROLINE Autoimmune Inflammatory Myopathies 16 Ag et cN-1A (IgG) line immunoassay) and verification with an anti-cN1A antibody assay using ELISA (IgG) (Euroimmun Lubeck, Germany). Results: The serum samples of 20 (5.88%) patients (15 females, 5 males, mean age 58.76 ± 18.31) tested positive for anti-cN1A using LIA, but only two out of twenty were diagnosed with IBM. Seventeen out of twenty tested positive for anti-cN1A using ELISA (median IQR, 2.9 (1.9–4.18)). Conclusions: Our study suggests excellent concordance between LIA and ELISA for detecting anti-cN1A antibodies. LIA may be a rapid and useful adjunct, and it could even replace ELISA for cN1A assay. However, the high prevalence of diseases other than IBM in our cohort of anti-cN1A-positive patients did not allow us to consider anti-cN1A antibodies as a specific biomarker for IBM.