UpToDate
Official reprint from UpToDate®
www.uptodate.com ©2016 UpToDate®

Clinical significance of antinuclear antibody staining patterns and associated autoantibodies

Author
Donald B Bloch, MD
Section Editor
Robert H Shmerling, MD
Deputy Editor
Monica Ramirez Curtis, MD, MPH

INTRODUCTION

The indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) test for antinuclear antibodies (ANA), using the human cell line HEp-2 as substrate, is a commonly used assay to detect human autoantibodies. The results of ANA testing are reported in two parts: the titer of the antibodies and the staining pattern produced by the antibodies. The titer of the antibodies refers to the highest dilution of serum that produces visible fluorescence. The ANA pattern refers to the distribution of staining produced by autoantibodies reacting with antigens in the HEp-2 cell nucleus and cytoplasm. The measurement and clinical significance of ANA titer is reviewed elsewhere. (See "Measurement and clinical significance of antinuclear antibodies".)

Unfortunately, there is limited agreement among laboratories as to which ANA staining patterns should be identified and reported to clinicians. The patterns to be reported are determined by individual laboratory directors. The directors also choose from among HEp-2 cell slides prepared by different companies. These companies may use different fixative and permeabilization techniques. Depending on the preparation of the HEp-2 cell substrate, some autoantibodies may or may not be detected by IIF. The clinician should know which staining patterns are recognized and reported by their reference laboratory.

An international workshop attempted to arrive at a consensus on the nomenclature of ANA staining patterns [1]. The participants suggested that there are 11 staining patterns that “must” be reported by all “competent-level” laboratories. An additional 22 ANA staining patterns should be reported by “expert-level” laboratories. Whether or not the recommendations of the workshop will become widely accepted remains to be determined.

This topic review will cover three broad categories of ANA staining patterns: nuclear, cell cycle-associated, and cytoplasmic. Within each of these categories, individual patterns will be defined and autoantibodies that produce the staining patterns will be identified. The disease associations of autoantibodies producing the staining patterns will be described as well as additional laboratory tests that may be used to further characterize the autoantibodies.

ANA STAINING PATTERNS INVOLVING THE NUCLEUS

Homogeneous

Definition – The homogenous antinuclear antibody (ANA) pattern refers to diffuse staining of the nucleus in resting cells. There is also diffuse staining of the chromosome region in dividing cells. The homogenous staining pattern was reported in 36 percent of more than 9200 ANA-positive serum samples tested at the University Hospitals in Leuven, Belgium [2].

                          

Subscribers log in here

To continue reading this article, you must log in with your personal, hospital, or group practice subscription. For more information or to purchase a personal subscription, click below on the option that best describes you:
Literature review current through: Nov 2016. | This topic last updated: Wed Nov 18 00:00:00 GMT+00:00 2015.
The content on the UpToDate website is not intended nor recommended as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your own physician or other qualified health care professional regarding any medical questions or conditions. The use of this website is governed by the UpToDate Terms of Use ©2016 UpToDate, Inc.
References
Top
  1. Chan EK, Damoiseaux J, Carballo OG, et al. Report of the First International Consensus on Standardized Nomenclature of Antinuclear Antibody HEp-2 Cell Patterns 2014-2015. Front Immunol 2015; 6:412.
  2. Vermeersch P, Bossuyt X. Prevalence and clinical significance of rare antinuclear antibody patterns. Autoimmun Rev 2013; 12:998.
  3. Haugbro K, Nossent JC, Winkler T, et al. Anti-dsDNA antibodies and disease classification in antinuclear antibody positive patients: the role of analytical diversity. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63:386.
  4. Eriksson C, Engstrand S, Sundqvist KG, Rantapää-Dahlqvist S. Autoantibody formation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with anti-TNF alpha. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64:403.
  5. Schulte-Pelkum J, Fritzler M, Mahler M. Latest update on the Ro/SS-A autoantibody system. Autoimmun Rev 2009; 8:632.
  6. Mimori T. Atlas of Antinuclear Antibodies. Nagoya: Medical and Biological Laboratories Co, LTD, 1999.
  7. Blomberg S, Ronnblom L, Wallgren AC, et al. Anti-SSA/Ro antibody determination by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay as a supplement to standard immunofluorescence in antinuclear antibody screening. Scand J Immunol 2000; 51:612.
  8. Ho KT, Reveille JD. The clinical relevance of autoantibodies in scleroderma. Arthritis Res Ther 2003; 5:80.
  9. Rigolet A, Musset L, Dubourg O, et al. Inflammatory myopathies with anti-Ku antibodies: a prognosis dependent on associated lung disease. Medicine (Baltimore) 2012; 91:95.
  10. Ghirardello A, Zampieri S, Iaccarino L, et al. Anti-Mi-2 antibodies. Autoimmunity 2005; 38:79.
  11. Ghirardello A, Bassi N, Palma L, et al. Autoantibodies in polymyositis and dermatomyositis. Curr Rheumatol Rep 2013; 15:335.
  12. Ghirardello A, Borella E, Beggio M, et al. Myositis autoantibodies and clinical phenotypes. Auto Immun Highlights 2014; 5:69.
  13. Koga T, Fujikawa K, Horai Y, et al. The diagnostic utility of anti-melanoma differentiation-associated gene 5 antibody testing for predicting the prognosis of Japanese patients with DM. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2012; 51:1278.
  14. Barada FA Jr, Andrews BS, Davis JS 4th, Taylor RP. Antibodies to Sm in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Correlation of Sm antibody titers with disease activity and other laboratory parameters. Arthritis Rheum 1981; 24:1236.
  15. Beaufils M, Kouki F, Mignon F, et al. Clinical significance of anti-Sm antibodies in systemic lupus erythematosus. Am J Med 1983; 74:201.
  16. Phan TG, Wong RC, Adelstein S. Autoantibodies to extractable nuclear antigens: making detection and interpretation more meaningful. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 2002; 9:1.
  17. Arroyo-Ávila M, Santiago-Casas Y, McGwin G Jr, et al. Clinical associations of anti-Smith antibodies in PROFILE: a multi-ethnic lupus cohort. Clin Rheumatol 2015; 34:1217.
  18. Bizzaro N, Tonutti E, Visentini D, et al. Antibodies to the lens and cornea in anti-DFS70-positive subjects. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2007; 1107:174.
  19. Dellavance A, Viana VS, Leon EP, et al. The clinical spectrum of antinuclear antibodies associated with the nuclear dense fine speckled immunofluorescence pattern. J Rheumatol 2005; 32:2144.
  20. Watanabe A, Kodera M, Sugiura K, et al. Anti-DFS70 antibodies in 597 healthy hospital workers. Arthritis Rheum 2004; 50:892.
  21. Miyara M, Albesa R, Charuel JL, et al. Clinical phenotypes of patients with anti-DFS70/LEDGF antibodies in a routine ANA referral cohort. Clin Dev Immunol 2013; 2013:703759.
  22. Mahler M, Parker T, Peebles CL, et al. Anti-DFS70/LEDGF antibodies are more prevalent in healthy individuals compared to patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases. J Rheumatol 2012; 39:2104.
  23. Mariz HA, Sato EI, Barbosa SH, et al. Pattern on the antinuclear antibody-HEp-2 test is a critical parameter for discriminating antinuclear antibody-positive healthy individuals and patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases. Arthritis Rheum 2011; 63:191.
  24. Khan S, Alvi A, Holding S, et al. The clinical significance of antinucleolar antibodies. J Clin Pathol 2008; 61:283.
  25. Steen VD. Autoantibodies in systemic sclerosis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2005; 35:35.
  26. Hamaguchi Y, Fujimoto M, Matsushita T, et al. Common and distinct clinical features in adult patients with anti-aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase antibodies: heterogeneity within the syndrome. PLoS One 2013; 8:e60442.
  27. Yang WH, Yu JH, Nakajima A, et al. Do antinuclear antibodies in primary biliary cirrhosis patients identify increased risk for liver failure? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004; 2:1116.
  28. Hanly JG, Thompson K, McCurdy G, et al. Measurement of autoantibodies using multiplex methodology in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Immunol Methods 2010; 352:147.
  29. Hossny E, Hady HA, Mabrouk R. Anti-centromere antibodies as a marker of Raynaud's phenomenon in pediatric rheumatologic diseases. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2000; 11:250.
  30. Bizzaro N, Covini G, Rosina F, et al. Overcoming a "probable" diagnosis in antimitochondrial antibody negative primary biliary cirrhosis: study of 100 sera and review of the literature. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol 2012; 42:288.
  31. Onouchi H, Muro Y, Tomita Y. Clinical features and IgG subclass distribution of anti-p80 coilin antibodies. J Autoimmun 1999; 13:225.
  32. Vázquez-Talavera J, Ramírez-Sandoval R, Esparza Ibarra E, et al. Autoantibodies against Cajal bodies in systemic lupus erythematosus. Med Sci Monit 2004; 10:BR130.
  33. Andrade LE, Chan EK, Raska I, et al. Human autoantibody to a novel protein of the nuclear coiled body: immunological characterization and cDNA cloning of p80-coilin. J Exp Med 1991; 173:1407.
  34. Nesher G, Margalit R, Ashkenazi YJ. Anti-nuclear envelope antibodies: Clinical associations. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2001; 30:313.
  35. Duarte-Rey C, Bogdanos D, Yang CY, et al. Primary biliary cirrhosis and the nuclear pore complex. Autoimmun Rev 2012; 11:898.
  36. Fritzler MJ, McCarty GA, Ryan JP, Kinsella TD. Clinical features of patients with antibodies directed against proliferating cell nuclear antigen. Arthritis Rheum 1983; 26:140.
  37. Vermeersch P, De Beeck KO, Lauwerys BR, et al. Antinuclear antibodies directed against proliferating cell nuclear antigen are not specifically associated with systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis 2009; 68:1791.
  38. Rattner JB, Rees J, Whitehead CM, et al. High frequency of neoplasia in patients with autoantibodies to centromere protein CENP-F. Clin Invest Med 1997; 20:308.
  39. Szalat R, Ghillani-Dalbin P, Jallouli M, et al. Anti-NuMA1 and anti-NuMA2 (anti-HsEg5) antibodies: Clinical and immunological features: A propos of 40 new cases and review of the literature. Autoimmun Rev 2010; 9:652.
  40. Bloch D. Unpublished data. 2015.
  41. Berg PA, Klein R. Mitochondrial antigens and autoantibodies: from anti-M1 to anti-M9. Klin Wochenschr 1986; 64:897.
  42. Dähnrich C, Pares A, Caballeria L, et al. New ELISA for detecting primary biliary cirrhosis-specific antimitochondrial antibodies. Clin Chem 2009; 55:978.
  43. Dalakas MC. Inflammatory muscle diseases. N Engl J Med 2015; 372:1734.
  44. Casciola-Rosen L, Mammen AL. Myositis autoantibodies. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2012; 24:602.
  45. Aubert V, Pisler IG, Spertini F. Improved diagnoses of autoimmune hepatitis using an anti-actin ELISA. J Clin Lab Anal 2008; 22:340.
  46. Fritzler MJ, Etherington J, Sokoluk C, et al. Antibodies from patients with autoimmune disease react with a cytoplasmic antigen in the Golgi apparatus. J Immunol 1984; 132:2904.
  47. Hong HS, Morshed SA, Tanaka S, et al. Anti-Golgi antibody in rheumatoid arthritis patients recognizes a novel antigen of 79 kDa (doublet) by western blot. Scand J Immunol 1992; 36:785.
  48. Bizzaro N, Pasini P, Ghirardello A, Finco B. High anti-golgi autoantibody levels: an early sign of autoimmune disease? Clin Rheumatol 1999; 18:346.
  49. Seelig HP, Appelhans H, Bauer O, et al. Autoantibodies against inosine-5'-monophosphate dehydrogenase 2--characteristics and prevalence in patients with HCV-infection. Clinical Lab 2011; 57:753.
  50. Calise SJ, Keppeke GD, Andrade LE, Chan EK. Anti-rods/rings: a human model of drug-induced autoantibody generation. Front Immunol 2015; 6:41.