TY - JOUR
T1 - Inter-Laboratory Validation of Nodal/Paranodal Antibody Testing
AU - Lleixà, Cinta
AU - Titulaer, Maarten
AU - Rohrbacher, Sophia
AU - Mgbachi, Victor
AU - Halstead, Susan
AU - Fehmi, Janev
AU - Pascual-Goñi, Elba
AU - Zhu, Louisa
AU - Appeltshauser, Luise
AU - Franken, Suzanne
AU - Paunovic, Manuela
AU - Waters, Patrick
AU - Willison, Hugh
AU - Sommer, Claudia
AU - Querol, Luis
AU - Huizinga, Ruth
AU - Doppler, Kathrin
AU - Rinaldi, Simon
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s). Journal of the Peripheral Nervous System published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Peripheral Nerve Society.
PY - 2025/3
Y1 - 2025/3
N2 - Background and Aims: Reliable detection of antibodies against nodal targets is vital for the diagnosis of autoimmune nodopathies. The performance characteristics of recently developed in-house assays are unknown. We compared testing at four centres. Methods: Each submitted 29–40 serum samples to a coordinating centre from one of three groups: (1) autoimmune nodopathy patients, with positive nodal/paranodal antibodies; (2) seronegative patients with other inflammatory neuropathies, and (3) healthy individuals or those with other neurological diseases. The coordinating centre recoded all samples and returned 160 identical aliquots to each testing centre for blinded testing. Once data from all centres had been received by the coordinating centre, unblinded results were returned for analysis. Sensitivity was defined by the proportion of group 1 samples returned as positive. Accuracy was defined as 0.075(sensitivity) + 0.925(specificity). Results: Centres performed various combinations of ELISA, cell-based (CBAs) and teased-nerve fibre assays. All labs produced highly accurate results (96%–100%) and concordance for the overall result across at least 3 or all 4 test centres was observed for 98% and 89% of the samples respectively. However, 10/30 individual assays (6/14 CBAs and 4/16 ELISAs) were less than 90% sensitive. Only 3 assays had more than 1 false positive result (2 ELISAs and 1 CBA). Combining different assay modalities to produce an overall result did not improve accuracy. Inter-laboratory consistency in the determination of antibody subclasses was poor. Interpretation: Although most samples were correctly categorised in all 4 centres, the use of a specific test modality or multiple tests did not guarantee accuracy. Early and repeated interlaboratory testing with sharing of samples is important to understand test performance and reproducibility, identify areas for improvement and maintain consistency. To aid this, we provide detailed methods for the best performing tests. Further standardisation of antibody subclass determination is required.
AB - Background and Aims: Reliable detection of antibodies against nodal targets is vital for the diagnosis of autoimmune nodopathies. The performance characteristics of recently developed in-house assays are unknown. We compared testing at four centres. Methods: Each submitted 29–40 serum samples to a coordinating centre from one of three groups: (1) autoimmune nodopathy patients, with positive nodal/paranodal antibodies; (2) seronegative patients with other inflammatory neuropathies, and (3) healthy individuals or those with other neurological diseases. The coordinating centre recoded all samples and returned 160 identical aliquots to each testing centre for blinded testing. Once data from all centres had been received by the coordinating centre, unblinded results were returned for analysis. Sensitivity was defined by the proportion of group 1 samples returned as positive. Accuracy was defined as 0.075(sensitivity) + 0.925(specificity). Results: Centres performed various combinations of ELISA, cell-based (CBAs) and teased-nerve fibre assays. All labs produced highly accurate results (96%–100%) and concordance for the overall result across at least 3 or all 4 test centres was observed for 98% and 89% of the samples respectively. However, 10/30 individual assays (6/14 CBAs and 4/16 ELISAs) were less than 90% sensitive. Only 3 assays had more than 1 false positive result (2 ELISAs and 1 CBA). Combining different assay modalities to produce an overall result did not improve accuracy. Inter-laboratory consistency in the determination of antibody subclasses was poor. Interpretation: Although most samples were correctly categorised in all 4 centres, the use of a specific test modality or multiple tests did not guarantee accuracy. Early and repeated interlaboratory testing with sharing of samples is important to understand test performance and reproducibility, identify areas for improvement and maintain consistency. To aid this, we provide detailed methods for the best performing tests. Further standardisation of antibody subclass determination is required.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85216669678&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/jns.70000
DO - 10.1111/jns.70000
M3 - Article
C2 - 39887819
AN - SCOPUS:85216669678
SN - 1085-9489
VL - 30
JO - Journal of the Peripheral Nervous System
JF - Journal of the Peripheral Nervous System
IS - 1
M1 - e70000
ER -