ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 2190

Antiphospholipid Syndrome Alliance for Clinical Trials and International Networking (APS ACTION) Core Laboratory Validation Exercise: Comparison of Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbant Assay (ELISA) and Chemiluminescence Immunoassay (CIA)

Maria Laura Bertolaccini1, Danieli Andrade2, Gabriella Lakos3, Rohan Willis4, Vittorio Pengo5, Alessandra Banzato6, Hannah Cohen7, Steven Krilis8, Doruk Erkan9 and on behalf of APS ACTION, 1Lupus Unit, Rayne Institute, Lupus Research Unit, The Rayne Institute, King's College London School of Medicine, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom, 2Rheumatology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil, 3INOVA Diagnostics, Inc., San Diego, CA, 4Department of Internal Medicine, Antiphospholipid Standardization Laboratory, Division of Rheumatology, Galveston, TX, 5Clinical Cardiology, Department of Cardiac Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padova, Padova, Italy, 6Department of Cardiac Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, Department of Cardiac Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua, Padua, Italy, 7Hematology., University College London, LOndon, United Kingdom, 8Immunology, Allergy, and Infectious Diseases, St George Hospital, Kogarah NSW, Australia, 9Rheumatology, Barbara Volcker Center for Women and Rheumatic Diseases: Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY

Meeting: 2015 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Date of first publication: September 29, 2015

Keywords: Anticardiolipin, antiphospholipid antibodies and antiphospholipid syndrome, Diagnostic Tests

  • 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: Tuesday, November 10, 2015

Title: Antiphospholipid Syndrome: Clinical

Session Type: ACR Poster Session C

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: APS ACTION International Clinical Database and Repository was created to study the natural course of disease over 10 years in persistently aPL-positive patients with/without other systemic autoimmune diseases. The protocol involves testing for anticardiolipin antibodies (aCL) and anti-β2glycoprotein I antibodies (aβ2GPI) at five different international core laboratories in samples collected at multiple sites. Although all core laboratories use the same ELISA kits, APS ACTION core laboratory directors agreed that an exchange of samples to assess intra- and inter-laboratory variability is crucial to establish whether an acceptable agreement among the core labs can be achieved. As part of the this validation exercise, two different assays were used.

We designed this study to assess between-laboratory agreement obtained with a novel antiphospholipid (aPL) chemiluminescence immunoassay (CIA), and compare the results to those obtained with ELISA assays.

Methods: Blinded serum samples from aPL positive patients and controls (n=30) were distributed to the five APS ACTION core laboratories. All samples were tested for IgG, IgM and IgA aCL and aβ2GPI with the FDA cleared QUANTA Flash® CIA and QUANTA Lite® ELISA kits (Inova Diagnostics).  For every sample, the average, SD and %CV of the values were calculated. Between laboratory precision was considered acceptable if %CV was less than 20%. 

Results: Categorical agreement between the two methods was 100%, 97% and 77% for IgG, IgM and IgA aCL, respectively, and 87%, 93% and 77% for IgG, IgM and IgA aβ2GPI, respectively. The correlation between quantitative results was good (Spearman rho 0.917, 0.809 and 0.893 for IgG, IgM and IgA aCL, respectively; rho 0.938, 0.766 and 0.78 for IgG, IgM and IgA anti-β2GPI. All p values <0.0001). Only CIA met the <20% total CV acceptance criteria for all the samples with all the assays. %CV was higher for ELISA and, in some cases, well outside the acceptable range (Table).

 

aCL

aβ2GPI

 

CIA

ELISA

CIA

ELISA

IgG

11%

[0%-19%]

22%

[7%-36%]

7%

[0%-20%]

22%

[8%-38%]

IgM

7%

[4%-8%]

45%

[30%-68%]

9%

[4%-16%]

15%

[3%-22%]

IgA

8%

[3%-13%]

34%

[25%-43%]

10%

[4%-18%]

34%

[4%-53%]

Conclusion: IgG and IgM aCL and aβ2GPI results showed good agreement between CIA and ELISA. Agreement was lower for IgA assays due to borderline samples being positive for CIA (a very sensitive test) and negative for the ELISA. Based on the evaluations performed in the APS ACTION Core Laboratories, CIA and ELISA tests displayed substantially equivalent performance for the detection of aCL and aβ2GPI. QUANTA Flash® CIA, a fully automated assay, however, showed higher level of reproducibility, making inter-laboratory comparisons more reliable.


Disclosure: M. L. Bertolaccini, None; D. Andrade, None; G. Lakos, Inova Diagnostics, Inc., 3; R. Willis, None; V. Pengo, None; A. Banzato, None; H. Cohen, None; S. Krilis, None; D. Erkan, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Bertolaccini ML, Andrade D, Lakos G, Willis R, Pengo V, Banzato A, Cohen H, Krilis S, Erkan D. Antiphospholipid Syndrome Alliance for Clinical Trials and International Networking (APS ACTION) Core Laboratory Validation Exercise: Comparison of Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbant Assay (ELISA) and Chemiluminescence Immunoassay (CIA) [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2015; 67 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/antiphospholipid-syndrome-alliance-for-clinical-trials-and-international-networking-aps-action-core-laboratory-validation-exercise-comparison-of-enzyme-linked-immunosorbant-assay-elisa-and-c/. 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 2015 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/antiphospholipid-syndrome-alliance-for-clinical-trials-and-international-networking-aps-action-core-laboratory-validation-exercise-comparison-of-enzyme-linked-immunosorbant-assay-elisa-and-c/

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 »

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 ET on November 14, 2024. 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