ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2025
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • 2020-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 0195

Utility of Repeat ANA Testing

Michael Luggen1 and Sila Mateo Faxas2, 1University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, 2Good Samaritan Hospital, Cincinnati, OH

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2025

Keywords: Autoantibody(ies), Cost-Effectiveness

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Sunday, October 26, 2025

Title: (0175–0198) Health Services Research Poster I

Session Type: Poster Session A

Session Time: 10:30AM-12:30PM

Background/Purpose: The ANA by immunofluorescence is a sensitive screening test for most systemic auto-immune rheumatic diseases (SARDs). A negative result is oftentimes sufficient to exclude a diagnosis. However, when diagnostic uncertainty persists, repeat testing is sometimes performed. The utility of a subsequent positive result is not clear. Only one previous study has examined the predictive value of a subsequent positive test after an initial negative result and found that only 1.1% of such patients developed a SARD. The purpose of this study was to attempt to validate this result in a different population of patients followed longitudinally and specifically evaluated by a rheumatologist, something that had not been done previously.

Methods: All patients aged ≥18 years seen at the University of Cincinnati Medical Center who tested negative for ANA initially and subsequently tested positive and who were evaluated by a rheumatologist on one or more occasions between April 2015 and April 2024 constituted the study population. Clinical diagnoses were established by board-certified rheumatologists and independently verified through comprehensive electronic medical record review by a second rheumatologist.

Results: Of 4129 patients who underwent ANA testing and were evaluated by a rheumatologist during the study period, 296 (7.2%) had discordant results. Among these, 103 patients (2.5% of total cohort) had an initially negative ANA followed by a subsequent positive one. Records were reviewed before and after the positive result to determine if the diagnoses had been revised. In only 4 patients or 3.8% of cases did a positive result lead to a change in diagnosis. The revised diagnoses in these 4 patients were: UCTD (1), SLE (1), Sjogren’s (1), undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis (1).

Conclusion: Repeat ANA testing after a negative result in patients suspected of having connective tissue disease infrequently results in a new diagnosis. Such testing is not cost-effective and should be discouraged in clinical practice guidelines.


Disclosures: M. Luggen: AbbVie/Abbott, 5, Biogen, 5, Priovant, 5, Sun Pharma, 2; S. Mateo Faxas: None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Luggen M, Mateo Faxas S. Utility of Repeat ANA Testing [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2025; 77 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/utility-of-repeat-ana-testing/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2025

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/utility-of-repeat-ana-testing/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

Embargo Policy

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM CT on October 25. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology