The importance of detecting anti-DFS70 in routine clinical practice: comparison of different care settings

Carolien Bonroy, Sofie Schouwers, Mario Berth, Muriel Stubbe, Yves Piette, Ilse Hoffman, Katrien Devreese, Lieve Van Hoovels

Screening for antinuclear antibodies by indirect immunofluorescence (ANA-IIF) is essential in the diagnostic workup of ANA-associated autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AARDs). However, also healthy individuals may test positive, making the interpretation challenging. Recent reports suggest that dense fine speckled 70 antibodies (anti-DFS70) may facilitate this challenge. Here, we investigate their clinical importance based on data from four Belgian laboratories (one primary, two secondary and one tertiary care). At least one specific DFS70 assay (DFS70 IgG ELISA or lineblot [Euroimmun, full length antigen] and/or DFS70 IgG CLIA [Inova Diagnostics, truncated antigen]) was performed on four consecutive cohorts of homogeneous-like ANA-IIF samples (n=697). Co-occurrence with AARD-specific ANA and clinical information were documented in the anti-DFS70-positive samples. Using a combination of solid phase techniques, we found between 7.6% and 26% anti-DFS70 in the different cohorts. Focusing on anti-DFS70 CLIA-positive samples without co-occurrence of AARD-specific ANA, we observed a trend towards lower frequency in tertiary (8% [p=0.0786]) and secondary care (12% [p=0.1275] and 6% [p<0.001]) compared to primary care (21%). Moreover, in this specific subpopulation, AARD was less frequent (0%-50% compared to 6%-77% in the total anti-DFS70-positive group). Anti-DFS70 prevalence depends on the applied assay and care setting. Our data suggest that, for an ANA-IIF-positive patient, it is rather the absence of AARD-associated ANA and clinical symptoms that contribute to the exclusion of AARD than the presence of anti-DFS70. Nevertheless, isolated anti-DFS70 helps to clarify positive ANA-IIF results, especially if pretest probability for AARD is low.