Comparison of two extractable nuclear antigen testing algorithms: ALBIA versus ELISA/line immunoassay

Extractable nuclear antigen (ENA) antibody testing is often requested in patients with suspected connective tissue diseases. Most laboratories in Australia use a two step process involving a high sensitivity screening assay followed by a high specificity confirmation test. Multiplexing technology with Addressable Laser Bead Immunoassay (e.g., FIDIS) offers simultaneous detection of multiple antibody specificities, allowing a single step screening and confirmation. We compared our current diagnostic laboratory testing algorithm [Organtec ELISA screen /Euroimmun line immunoassay (LIA) confirmation] and the FIDIS Connective Profile. A total of 529 samples (443 consecutive + 86 known autoantibody positivity) were run through both algorithms, and 479 samples (90.5%) were concordant. The same autoantibody profile was detected in 100 samples (18.9%) and 379 were concordant negative samples (71.6%). The 50 discordant samples (9.5%) were subdivided into 'likely FIDIS or current method correct' or 'unresolved' based on ancillary data. 'Unresolved' samples (n = 25) were subclassified into 'potentially' versus 'potentially not' clinically significant based on the change to clinical interpretation. Only nine samples (1.7%) were deemed to be 'potentially clinically significant'. Overall, we found that the FIDIS Connective Profile ENA kit is non-inferior to the current ELISA screen/LIA characterisation. Reagent and capital costs may be limiting factors in using the FIDIS, but potential benefits include a single step analysis and simultaneous detection of dsDNA antibodies.