Comparison of Two Diagnostic Assays for Anti-Laminin 332 Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid

Stephanie Goletz; Federica Giurdanella; Maike M. Holtsche; Miranda Nijenhuis; Barbara Horvath; Gilles F.H. Diercks; Detlef Zillikens; Takashi Hashimoto; Enno Schmidt; Hendri H. Pas

doi:10.3389/fimmu.2021.773720

Comparison of Two Diagnostic Assays for Anti-Laminin 332 Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid

Stephanie Goletz, Federica Giurdanella, Maike M. Holtsche, Miranda Nijenhuis, Barbara Horvath, Gilles F.H. Diercks, Detlef Zillikens, Takashi Hashimoto, Enno Schmidt^*, Hendri H. Pas

^*Corresponding author for this work

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Anti-laminin 332 mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) is an autoimmune blistering disease characterized by predominant mucosal lesions and autoantibodies against laminin 332. The exact diagnosis of anti-laminin 332 MMP is important since nearly 30% of patients develop solid cancers. This study compared two independently developed diagnostic indirect immunofluorescence (IF) tests based on recombinant laminin 332 expressed in HEK239 cells (biochip mosaic assay) and the migration trails of cultured keratinocytes rich in laminin 332 (footprint assay). The sera of 54 anti-laminin 332 MMP, 35 non-anti-laminin 332 MMP, and 30 pemphigus vulgaris patients as well as 20 healthy blood donors were analyzed blindly and independently. Fifty-two of 54 and 54/54 anti-laminin 332 MMP sera were positive in the biochip mosaic and the footprint assay, respectively. In the 35 non-anti-laminin 332 MMP sera, 3 were positive in both tests and 4 others showed weak reactivity in the footprint assay. In conclusion, both assays are easy to perform, highly sensitive, and specific, which will further facilitate the diagnosis of anti-laminin 332 MMP.

Original language	English
Article number	773720
Journal	Frontiers in Immunology
Volume	12
ISSN	1664-3224
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2021.773720
Publication status	Published - 25.11.2021

Funding

This work was supported by structural funding from the Schleswig-Holstein Excellence Cluster Precision Medicine in This work was supported by structural funding from the Schleswig-Holstein Excellence Cluster Precision Medicine in Chronic Inflammation (DFG EXC 2167/1) and the CRU 303 Pemphigoid Diseases (to DZ and ES) Biochip mosaics were provided free of charge by Euroimmun, L?beck, Germany.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Research Areas and Centers

Academic Focus: Center for Infection and Inflammation Research (ZIEL)
Centers: Center for Research on Inflammation of the Skin (CRIS)

DFG Research Classification Scheme

2.21-05 Immunology
2.22-19 Dermatology

Access to Document

10.3389/fimmu.2021.773720

Cite this

@article{2f78d0807f9c4fd68fb361361b3c9ced,

title = "Comparison of Two Diagnostic Assays for Anti-Laminin 332 Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid",

abstract = "Anti-laminin 332 mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) is an autoimmune blistering disease characterized by predominant mucosal lesions and autoantibodies against laminin 332. The exact diagnosis of anti-laminin 332 MMP is important since nearly 30\% of patients develop solid cancers. This study compared two independently developed diagnostic indirect immunofluorescence (IF) tests based on recombinant laminin 332 expressed in HEK239 cells (biochip mosaic assay) and the migration trails of cultured keratinocytes rich in laminin 332 (footprint assay). The sera of 54 anti-laminin 332 MMP, 35 non-anti-laminin 332 MMP, and 30 pemphigus vulgaris patients as well as 20 healthy blood donors were analyzed blindly and independently. Fifty-two of 54 and 54/54 anti-laminin 332 MMP sera were positive in the biochip mosaic and the footprint assay, respectively. In the 35 non-anti-laminin 332 MMP sera, 3 were positive in both tests and 4 others showed weak reactivity in the footprint assay. In conclusion, both assays are easy to perform, highly sensitive, and specific, which will further facilitate the diagnosis of anti-laminin 332 MMP.",

author = "Stephanie Goletz and Federica Giurdanella and Holtsche, \{Maike M.\} and Miranda Nijenhuis and Barbara Horvath and Diercks, \{Gilles F.H.\} and Detlef Zillikens and Takashi Hashimoto and Enno Schmidt and Pas, \{Hendri H.\}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: Copyright {\textcopyright} 2021 Goletz, Giurdanella, Holtsche, Nijenhuis, Horvath, Diercks, Zillikens, Hashimoto, Schmidt and Pas.",

year = "2021",

month = nov,

day = "25",

doi = "10.3389/fimmu.2021.773720",

language = "English",

volume = "12",

journal = "Frontiers in Immunology",

issn = "1664-3224",

publisher = "Frontiers Media",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of Two Diagnostic Assays for Anti-Laminin 332 Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid

AU - Goletz, Stephanie

AU - Giurdanella, Federica

AU - Holtsche, Maike M.

AU - Nijenhuis, Miranda

AU - Horvath, Barbara

AU - Diercks, Gilles F.H.

AU - Zillikens, Detlef

AU - Hashimoto, Takashi

AU - Schmidt, Enno

AU - Pas, Hendri H.

PY - 2021/11/25

Y1 - 2021/11/25

N2 - Anti-laminin 332 mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) is an autoimmune blistering disease characterized by predominant mucosal lesions and autoantibodies against laminin 332. The exact diagnosis of anti-laminin 332 MMP is important since nearly 30% of patients develop solid cancers. This study compared two independently developed diagnostic indirect immunofluorescence (IF) tests based on recombinant laminin 332 expressed in HEK239 cells (biochip mosaic assay) and the migration trails of cultured keratinocytes rich in laminin 332 (footprint assay). The sera of 54 anti-laminin 332 MMP, 35 non-anti-laminin 332 MMP, and 30 pemphigus vulgaris patients as well as 20 healthy blood donors were analyzed blindly and independently. Fifty-two of 54 and 54/54 anti-laminin 332 MMP sera were positive in the biochip mosaic and the footprint assay, respectively. In the 35 non-anti-laminin 332 MMP sera, 3 were positive in both tests and 4 others showed weak reactivity in the footprint assay. In conclusion, both assays are easy to perform, highly sensitive, and specific, which will further facilitate the diagnosis of anti-laminin 332 MMP.

AB - Anti-laminin 332 mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) is an autoimmune blistering disease characterized by predominant mucosal lesions and autoantibodies against laminin 332. The exact diagnosis of anti-laminin 332 MMP is important since nearly 30% of patients develop solid cancers. This study compared two independently developed diagnostic indirect immunofluorescence (IF) tests based on recombinant laminin 332 expressed in HEK239 cells (biochip mosaic assay) and the migration trails of cultured keratinocytes rich in laminin 332 (footprint assay). The sera of 54 anti-laminin 332 MMP, 35 non-anti-laminin 332 MMP, and 30 pemphigus vulgaris patients as well as 20 healthy blood donors were analyzed blindly and independently. Fifty-two of 54 and 54/54 anti-laminin 332 MMP sera were positive in the biochip mosaic and the footprint assay, respectively. In the 35 non-anti-laminin 332 MMP sera, 3 were positive in both tests and 4 others showed weak reactivity in the footprint assay. In conclusion, both assays are easy to perform, highly sensitive, and specific, which will further facilitate the diagnosis of anti-laminin 332 MMP.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85120968473

U2 - 10.3389/fimmu.2021.773720

DO - 10.3389/fimmu.2021.773720

M3 - Journal articles

C2 - 34899726

AN - SCOPUS:85120968473

SN - 1664-3224

VL - 12

JO - Frontiers in Immunology

JF - Frontiers in Immunology

M1 - 773720

ER -

Comparison of Two Diagnostic Assays for Anti-Laminin 332 Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid

Abstract

Funding

UN SDGs

Research Areas and Centers

DFG Research Classification Scheme

Access to Document

Other files and links

EXC 2167: Precision Medicine in Chronic Inflammation (PMI)

Cite this

Comparison of Two Diagnostic Assays for Anti-Laminin 332 Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid

Abstract

Funding

UN SDGs

Research Areas and Centers

DFG Research Classification Scheme

Access to Document

Other files and links

Projects

EXC 2167: Precision Medicine in Chronic Inflammation (PMI)

Cite this