Search

Objectives No reference data are available on repositories to measure precision of autoantibody assays. The scope of this study was to document inter- and intra-run variations of quantitative autoantibody assays based on a real-world large international data set. Methods Members of the European Autoimmunity Standardisation Initiative (EASI) group collected the data of intra- and inter-run variability obtained with assays quantifying 15 different autoantibodies in voluntary participating laboratories from their country. We analyzed the impact on the assay performances of the type of immunoassay, the number of measurements used to calculate the coefficient of variation (CVs), the nature and the autoantibody level of the internal quality control (IQC). Results Data were obtained from 64 laboratories from 15 European countries between February and October 2021. We analyzed 686 and 1,331 values of intra- and inter-run CVs, respectively. Both CVs were significantly dependent on: the method of immunoassay, the level of IQC with higher imprecision observed when the antibody levels were lower than 2-fold the threshold for positivity, and the nature of the IQC with commercial IQCs having lower CVs than patients-derived IQCs. Our analyses also show that the type of autoantibody has low impact on the assay' performances and that 15 measurements are sufficient to establish reliable intra- and inter-run variations. Conclusions This study provides for the first time an international repository yielding values of intra- and inter-run variation for quantitative autoantibody assays. These data could be useful for ISO 15189 accreditation requirements and will allow clinical diagnostic laboratories to assure quality of patient results.

Background and purpose: The goal of this study was to determine the prevalence and incidence of neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) in Hungary based on the 2015 International Panel of NMO Diagnosis (IPND) criteria. Methods: A retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted of 6.4 million Hungarians (age ≥ 16 years) between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2016. Possible NMOSD patients were selected via multistage re-evaluation from multiple sources. Crude and sex- and serostatus-specific prevalence (per 100 000 persons) and incidence rates (per 1 000 000 person-years) from 2006 to 2015 were estimated and age-adjusted rates were determined. Results: Of 2262 study candidates, 154 NMOSD patients (age ≥ 16 years) with onset until 31 December 2016 were identified based on 2015 IPND criteria. The prevalence analysis on 1 January 2016 included 123 NMOSD living cases, resulting in a prevalence of 1.91 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52–2.28] per 100 000 persons. The 101 incident cases emerging from the observed 76 394 288 person-years provided an incidence rate of 1.32 (95% CI 1.08–1.61) per 1 000 000 person-years. Age-adjusted prevalence was 1.87 (95% CI 1.56–2.23) per 100 000 persons and incidence was 1.20 (95% CI 0.98–1.46) per 1 000 000 person-years. Conclusions: In this first report of a large population-based epidemiological study from an Eastern European Caucasian population using robust case validation, a greater prevalence and incidence of NMOSD was found compared to previous large studies in Caucasian populations.

Objective Antibodies to cell surface central nervous system proteins help to diagnose conditions which often respond to immunotherapies. The assessment of antibody assays needs to reflect their clinical utility. We report the results of a multicentre study of aquaporin (AQP) 4 antibody (AQP4-Ab) assays in neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders (NMOSD). Methods Coded samples from patients with neuromyelitis optica (NMO) or NMOSD (101) and controls (92) were tested at 15 European diagnostic centres using 21 assays including live (n=3) or fixed cell-based assays (n=10), flow cytometry (n=4), immunohistochemistry (n=3) and ELISA (n=1). Results Results of tests on 92 controls identified 12assays as highly specific (0-1 false-positive results). 32 samples from 50 (64%) NMO sera and 34 from 51 (67%) NMOSD sera were positive on at least two of the 12 highly specific assays, leaving 35 patients with seronegative NMO/spectrum disorder (SD). On the basis of a combination of clinical phenotype and the highly specific assays, 66 AQP4-Ab seropositive samples were used to establish the sensitivities (51.5-100%) of all 21 assays. The specificities (85.8-100%) were based on 92 control samples and 35 seronegative NMO/SD patient samples. Conclusions The cell-based assays were most sensitive and specific overall, but immunohistochemistry or flow cytometry could be equally accurate in specialist centres. Since patients with AQP4-Ab negative NMO/SD require different management, the use of both appropriate control samples and defined seronegative NMOSD samples is essential to evaluate these assays in a clinically meaningful way. The process described here can be applied to the evaluation of other antibody assays in the newly evolving field of autoimmune neurology.