Autoantibody measurement is an excellent tool to confirm the diagnosis of rheumatic autoimmune diseases. Hence, reliability and harmonization of autoantibody testing are essential, but these issues ...are still a matter of debate. Intrinsic variability in analytes and reagents as well as heterogeneity of the techniques are the main reasons for discrepancies in inter-laboratory variations and reporting of test results. This lack of reliability might be responsible for wrong or missed diagnoses, as well as additional costs due to assay repetition, unnecessary use of confirmatory tests and/or consequent diagnostic investigations. To overcome such issues, the standardization of autoantibody testing requires efforts on all aspects of the assays, including the definition of the analyte, the pre-analytical stages, the calibration method and the reporting of results. As part of such efforts, the availability of suitable reference materials for calibration and quality control would enable the development of a reliable reference system. Strong-positive sera from patients have been used as reference materials in most of the autoantibody assays for rheumatic diseases; however, antigen-affinity-purified immunoglobulin fractions or in some cases reliable monoclonal antibody preparations offer more adequate tools for standardization. Systematic assessments of reference materials are currently underway, and preliminary results appear to be encouraging.
Producing robust, certified, traceable reference material for autoantibody testing is a vital element in maintaining the validity of results that are generated in the daily clinical laboratory ...routine. This is a huge challenge because of the high number of variables involved in the detection and measurement of the autoantibodies. The production of such materials is time consuming and needs rigorous attention to detail; this is best achieved by an overarching independent body who will oversee the process in a "not for profit" manner. Much effort has been made to build international standards for quantitative and qualitative assays based on monoclonal antibodies, obtained from affinity purification and plasmapheresis. The big challenge is to respect individual differences in immune response to the same antigen. A promising ongoing initiative is the construction of pools with monospecific samples from different individuals.
A large number of circumstances are associated with reduced serum concentrations of transthyretin (TTR), or prealbumin. The most common of these is the acute phase response, which may be due to ...inflammation, malignancy, trauma, or many other disorders. Some studies have shown a decrease in hospital stay with nutritional therapy based on TTR concentrations, but many recent studies have shown that concentrations of albumin, transferrin, and transthyretin correlate with severity of the underlying disease rather than with anthropometric indicators of hypo- or malnutrition. There are few if any conditions in which the concentration of this protein by itself is more helpful in diagnosis, prognosis, or follow up than are other clinical findings. In the majority of cases, the serum concentration of C-reactive protein is adequate for detection and monitoring of acute phase responses and for prognosis. Although over diagnosis and treatment of presumed protein energy malnutrition is probably not detrimental to most patients, the failure to detect other causes of decreased concentrations (such as serious bacterial infections or malignancy) of the so-called visceral or hepatic proteins could possibly result in increased morbidity or even mortality. In addition to these caveats, assays for TTR have a relatively high level of uncertainty (“imprecision”). Clinical evaluation – history and physical examination – should remain the mainstay of nutritional assessment. Clin Chem Lab Med 2007;45:419–26.
PDF
