Alicja Adaszewska, Agnieszka Kalińska-Bienias, Paweł Jagielski, Katarzyna Woźniak, Cezary Kowalewski
Journal: Journal of cutaneous pathology 2020;47(2):121-127
PMID: 31603994
BACKGROUND
Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is an autoimmune blistering disease associated with autoantibodies against BP180 and/or BP230 antigens. The immunoassays available for serological diagnostics include indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) on monkey esophagus (ME), salt-split skin (SSS), and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for BP180-NC16a and BP230. Only a few studies validated innovative BIOCHIP mosaic, but none compared agreement between BIOCHIP substrates with conventional methods separately.
METHODS
We evaluated the agreement between BIOCHIP and conventional methods and assessed sensitivity and specificity in BP diagnosis. The study comprised 51 BP patients and 39 controls.
RESULTS
Analysis showed very good agreement between BIOCHIP-SSS vs classic IIF-SSS (0.933, P < 0.001) and for BIOCHIP-BP180-NC16a vs ELISA-BP180-NC16a (0.933, P < 0.001). A good strength of agreement between BIOCHIP-ME vs classic IIF-ME was observed (0.694, P < 0.001) similar to BIOCHIP-BP230 vs ELISA-BP230 (0.793, P < 0.001). BIOCHIP-ME sensitivity was 51.0%, whereas IIF-ME was 76.5%. Epidermal reaction on BIOCHIP-SSS was found in 94.1% of BP patients and in all patients on IIF-SSS (sensitivity 100%). BIOCHIP-BP180-NC16a sensitivity was lower than in ELISA-BP180-NC16a (76.5% vs 82.4%). BP230 sensitivity of both methods was similar (45.1% vs 43.1%). The specificity for all antigens was 100%.
CONCLUSION
BIOCHIP mosaic is a useful method presenting satisfactory agreement with conventional immunoassays.
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence
We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.