ANA and Autoimmune Serology Pathway
Pre-test probability, ANA-directed serology and ACR/EULAR classification · v2.1- Four stages, each opened by the one before it, in the order the workup is actually done: clinical phenotype and pre-test probability, then the ANA, then only those antibodies the ANA pattern and the phenotype make relevant, and last the confirmatory and organ-staging tests.
- Enter the clinical picture first. A serological result entered without a clinical context cannot be interpreted, and the pathway does not let you start there.
- Give the ANA pattern as well as the titre. Without the pattern the module cannot narrow the panel, so it offers every group, which adds cost without adding information.
- You get the pre-test probability, one sourced likelihood ratio, the post-test probability that follows from it, and the classification criteria scored.
- A negative ANA narrows the workup, it does not end it. The vasculitis, antiphospholipid and rheumatoid arthritis strands stay open and the tool says so.
- Scope: adults of 18 and above, and the systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases only.
- Children and adolescents below 18. The weights and thresholds here are the adult ones.
- Organ-specific autoimmunity: autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cholangitis, coeliac disease, autoimmune thyroid disease, type 1 diabetes and LADA, myasthenia gravis, AQP4 and MOG antibody disease, autoimmune encephalitis, pemphigus and pemphigoid, and autoimmune gastritis.
- Disease activity indices. SLEDAI, BVAS, the modified Rodnan skin score and the ESSDAI are separate instruments.
- Treatment decisions of any kind, including the choice of immunosuppression and its monitoring.
- The EULAR/ACR 2017 myositis probability and the ACR/EULAR 2023 antiphospholipid criteria. The regression coefficients behind the first could not be verified, and Sydney 2006 is what the module applies for the second.
Stage 1. Clinical Context and Pre-test Probability
Antibody Atlas
What each antibody points to, what it is worth, and what it obliges you to do next. The action column is the part that matters: an antibody that does not change management is a laboratory result, not a clinical finding.
1. Nuclear Antibodies of Lupus and Overlap
| Antibody | Points to | Diagnostic worth | Action it obliges |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-dsDNA | SLE, lupus nephritis | 6 points in the 2019 criteria, but only on an assay with 90 per cent or better specificity. A screening ELISA does not qualify. | Monitor serially. A rising titre with falling C3 and C4 precedes a nephritis flare. |
| Anti-Sm | SLE, essentially only SLE | The most specific antibody in the panel. Specificity 99.7 per cent, likelihood ratio around 65, but sensitivity only 17 per cent. | Establishes the diagnosis. Do not repeat it: it does not track activity. |
| Anti-nucleosome | SLE | Similar specificity to anti-Sm with more than twice the sensitivity, around 42 per cent. Under-used in Indian laboratories. | Worth requesting when SLE is suspected and dsDNA and Sm are negative. |
| Anti-ribosomal P | Neuropsychiatric SLE, lupus hepatitis | Specificity around 99.6 per cent, sensitivity around 32 per cent. | In a patient with psychosis, supports a lupus attribution. It does not remove the obligation to exclude CNS infection first. |
| Anti-histone | Drug-induced lupus, but also idiopathic SLE | Sensitive, not specific. Useless without the drug history. | Take a full drug history including isoniazid, hydralazine, phenytoin, minocycline and anti-TNF agents. |
| Anti-U1 RNP | MCTD at high titre, SLE at any titre | High titre with no SLE-specific antibody suggests MCTD, but clinical features are still required. | Baseline echocardiography. Pulmonary arterial hypertension is the leading cause of death in MCTD. |
| Anti-DFS70 | Argues against a rheumatic disease | Only when monospecific, that is with no other antibody detectable. Present in a few per cent of healthy people. | In an otherwise well person with a dense fine speckled ANA, this is the result that lets you stop. |
2. Ro, La and the Pregnancy Consequence
| Antibody | Points to | Diagnostic worth | Action it obliges |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-Ro60 (SSA) | Sjögren's, SLE, subacute cutaneous lupus | 3 of the 4 points needed to classify Sjögren's. Cannot classify alone. | In a woman planning or carrying a pregnancy, this is the finding that changes obstetric care. |
| Anti-Ro52 (TRIM21) | Myositis, antisynthetase syndrome, interstitial lung disease, autoimmune hepatitis | Frequently misreported as a Sjögren's marker. It is not one in isolation. | Where the phenotype includes lung disease, treat as a signal to screen the lungs. |
| Anti-La (SSB) | Sjögren's, when accompanying anti-Ro | Absent from the 2016 criteria. An isolated anti-La carries little weight. | Do not diagnose Sjögren's on an isolated anti-La. |
3. Sclerosis Antibodies and What Each Predicts
| Antibody | Phenotype | Principal organ risk | Action it obliges |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-topoisomerase I (Scl-70) | Diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis | Interstitial lung disease | Baseline HRCT thorax and pulmonary function tests, then serial monitoring. |
| Anticentromere | Limited cutaneous disease, the CREST phenotype | Pulmonary arterial hypertension, late | Annual echocardiography. Lung fibrosis is less likely. |
| Anti-RNA polymerase III | Rapidly progressive diffuse skin thickening | Scleroderma renal crisis; also an association with malignancy around disease onset | Daily home blood pressure monitoring, and age-appropriate cancer screening. |
| Anti-PM-Scl | Sclerosis and myositis overlap | Lung and muscle | Assess both compartments. |
| Anti-fibrillarin (U3 RNP) | Diffuse disease, often younger patients | Pulmonary hypertension, cardiac and renal | Echocardiography and cardiac assessment. |
| Anti-Th/To | Limited disease | Interstitial lung disease and pulmonary hypertension | Do not be reassured by limited skin involvement. Screen the lungs. |
4. Myositis-specific Antibodies: One Antibody, One Syndrome
| Antibody | Syndrome | What it predicts | Action it obliges |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-Jo-1 and other antisynthetases | Antisynthetase syndrome: myositis, ILD, arthritis, mechanic's hands, Raynaud's, fever | Interstitial lung disease dominates the prognosis, and can precede the muscle disease | HRCT thorax and pulmonary function tests at diagnosis, whatever the CK. |
| Anti-MDA5 | Clinically amyopathic dermatomyositis with rapidly progressive ILD; cutaneous ulceration and palmar papules | Rapidly progressive, frequently fatal interstitial lung disease. CK is often normal or near normal, which is the point that catches people out | Urgent HRCT thorax. Early aggressive combined immunosuppression. Treat as a respiratory emergency, not a dermatological finding. |
| Anti-TIF1-gamma | Adult dermatomyositis with prominent skin disease | The strongest malignancy association among the myositis antibodies in adults. In juvenile disease it carries no malignancy association | Age-appropriate and symptom-directed malignancy screening at diagnosis, and repeated over the following three years. |
| Anti-NXP2 | Dermatomyositis with calcinosis | Calcinosis, severe muscle disease; malignancy association in adults | Malignancy screening in adults. Anticipate calcinosis in juvenile disease. |
| Anti-Mi-2 | Classic dermatomyositis with the full rash | Good response to treatment, favourable prognosis, low malignancy risk | Reassure, and treat conventionally. |
| Anti-SAE | Dermatomyositis, skin often precedes muscle | Dysphagia is common | Assess swallowing. |
| Anti-SRP | Immune-mediated necrotising myopathy | Very high CK, severe weakness, poor response to corticosteroids alone; cardiac involvement described | Early escalation beyond steroids: intravenous immunoglobulin or rituximab. |
| Anti-HMGCR | Immune-mediated necrotising myopathy, statin-associated | Weakness that persists or progresses after the statin is stopped. Can also occur without any statin exposure | Stop the statin, but do not expect that to be enough. Immunosuppression, often with intravenous immunoglobulin, is usually required. |
| Anti-Ku | Myositis and sclerosis overlap | Variable, often overlap features | Assess for both. |
5. ANCA and Anti-GBM
| Result | Points to | Cautions | Action it obliges |
|---|---|---|---|
| PR3-ANCA | Granulomatosis with polyangiitis | Also positive in cocaine adulterated with levamisole, which produces a strikingly similar destructive nasal picture | Ask about cocaine use before accepting the diagnosis. Exclude tuberculosis before accepting a cavitating lung lesion as GPA. |
| MPO-ANCA | Microscopic polyangiitis, EGPA, drug-induced vasculitis | The least specific result in the panel. Also seen in inflammatory bowel disease, autoimmune hepatitis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, endocarditis and tuberculosis, and with propylthiouracil, hydralazine and minocycline | A positive MPO-ANCA without a vasculitic syndrome is not a diagnosis and is not an indication to treat. |
| Immunofluorescence pattern alone | Nothing definite | The 2017 international consensus moved to antigen-specific immunoassay for PR3 and MPO as the primary screen. A c-ANCA or p-ANCA report without antigen specificity is an incomplete result | Request the antigen-specific assay before acting. |
| Anti-GBM | Anti-glomerular basement membrane disease | Around a third are also ANCA positive, usually MPO. Double-positive disease behaves like anti-GBM acutely and like ANCA vasculitis in its tendency to relapse | A true emergency. Plasma exchange, corticosteroids and cyclophosphamide, without waiting for biopsy where the presentation is fulminant. Test for ANCA in every anti-GBM patient. |
6. Antiphospholipid Antibodies
| Assay | Note | Action it obliges |
|---|---|---|
| Lupus anticoagulant | The strongest single predictor of thrombosis of the three. Cannot be interpreted reliably on warfarin, a direct oral anticoagulant, or during acute thrombosis | Time the test. If the patient is anticoagulated, say so on the request form and interpret with the laboratory. |
| Anticardiolipin IgG or IgM | Only medium or high titre counts: above 40 GPL or MPL units, or above the 99th centile | A low-titre transient positive after infection is common and should not be classified. |
| Anti-beta-2 glycoprotein I | Above the 99th centile | Part of the triple-positive assessment. |
| Triple positivity | All three positive carries the highest thrombotic risk | Warfarin, not a direct oral anticoagulant. The TRAPS trial found rivaroxaban inferior to warfarin in triple-positive patients, with excess arterial events. |
7. What a Negative Panel Does Not Exclude
A module organised around antibodies can imply, by its silence, that a negative panel is reassuring. It is not. The following are substantially or entirely seronegative, and several are more common in Indian practice than the diseases above.
| Disease | How it is diagnosed instead |
|---|---|
| Takayasu arteritis | Imaging of the aorta and its branches: CT or MR angiography. Young Indian women with limb claudication, absent pulses, a blood pressure difference between arms, or unexplained hypertension. No serological marker. |
| Behçet's disease | Clinical: recurrent oral and genital ulceration, uveitis, pathergy. HLA-B51 supports but does not diagnose. |
| Axial spondyloarthritis | Inflammatory back pain, sacroiliac imaging, HLA-B27. ANA and RF are irrelevant. |
| Adult-onset Still's disease | Quotidian fever, evanescent rash, arthritis, very high ferritin with a low glycosylated fraction. Diagnosis of exclusion. ANA and RF negative by definition in the classification criteria. |
| Sarcoidosis | Histology showing non-caseating granulomas, after tuberculosis has been excluded. In India that exclusion is the whole difficulty. |
| IgG4-related disease | Histology with storiform fibrosis and IgG4-positive plasma cells. Serum IgG4 is neither sensitive nor specific enough to stand alone. |
| Polymyalgia rheumatica and giant cell arteritis | Clinical, with acute phase response, temporal artery imaging or biopsy. |
| ANA-negative SLE | A small but real group. The 2019 criteria cannot classify them, and the authors say so explicitly. Classification criteria are not diagnostic criteria. |
1. Why Pre-test Probability Is the Whole Argument
The probability that the patient has the disease before the result is known. It decides what a positive result means, and nothing about the assay changes it.
- Who is positive without being ill. The 13.8 per cent is at a 1:80 cut-off and is not spread evenly. In NHANES it was 17.8 per cent of women against 9.6 per cent of men, and it rose with age, with the female-to-male ratio peaking at 40 to 49 years (Satoh 2012). The same titre in a 60-year-old woman and in a 20-year-old man is not the same finding.
- The question to ask before ordering. Not "could this be lupus" but "what would I do differently if it came back positive, and what would I do differently if it came back negative". If the answer to both is nothing, the test is not indicated.
- Indian context. ANA is increasingly ordered from primary care and in direct-to-consumer laboratory packages, bundled into a panel the patient bought with no clinical question attached, and unpicking an incidental low-titre ANA in a well person now takes up a great deal of rheumatology outpatient time. Stage 1 of this module exists to make the prior explicit before the number is looked at.
2. What Each Dilution Means
Fifteen international reference laboratories tested sera from healthy individuals on HEp-2 cells at four dilutions (Tan EM, Feltkamp TE, Smolen JS, et al. Arthritis Rheum. 1997;40(9):1601-1611). The figures below are the proportion of healthy people positive at each, and they are the reason a titre is reported at all.
| Titre | Healthy people positive | What it means at the bedside |
|---|---|---|
| 1:40 | 31.7 per cent | Almost a third of well people. Sensitive, and close to useless on its own. Below the entry criterion for the 2019 SLE criteria, which this module therefore will not apply at 1:40. |
| 1:80 | 13.3 per cent | The 2019 SLE entry criterion, and the NHANES cut-off. Roughly one well person in eight. Entry to the criteria, not evidence of disease. |
| 1:160 | 5.0 per cent | Excludes about 95 per cent of well people. Tan and colleagues recommend laboratories report at both 1:40 and 1:160 for exactly this reason. |
| 1:320 and above | 3.3 per cent at 1:320 | Uncommon in health, and where the likelihood ratio starts to do real work. Still not a diagnosis: 3.3 per cent of a large well population is a large number of people. |
Titre and pattern are two different results. The titre says how much antibody is present. The pattern says what it is against. A high titre with no pattern reported and no clinical syndrome is a laboratory number; a moderate titre with a centromere pattern in a woman with Raynaud's is a diagnosis waiting to be confirmed.
3. The Great Indian Mimics
| The mimic | How it presents | Which antibodies it can turn positive | What separates them |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tuberculosis | Chronic fever, weight loss, cavitating lung lesions resembling GPA, serositis, Poncet's reactive polyarthritis | RF, low-titre ANA, occasionally ANCA | Tissue diagnosis, CBNAAT, culture. A cavitating lesion in India is tuberculosis until proven otherwise. |
| Leprosy | Polyarthritis, neuropathy, skin lesions. Type 2 lepra reaction with erythema nodosum leprosum closely mimics systemic vasculitis | ANA, RF, sometimes ANCA, and false-positive antiphospholipid antibodies | Slit skin smear, nerve thickening, the distribution of the skin lesions. |
| Dengue and chikungunya | Severe symmetric polyarthritis, rash, thrombocytopenia. Chikungunya arthritis can persist for months and is regularly mistaken for early rheumatoid arthritis | RF, low-titre ANA, transient antiphospholipid antibodies | The epidemic context, the acute febrile prodrome, and serology for the virus. |
| Kikuchi-Fujimoto disease | Young woman, fever, tender cervical lymphadenopathy, cytopenias. Reproduces an SLE flare closely, and can coexist with SLE | Low-titre ANA | Lymph node biopsy. There is no serological shortcut. |
| HIV | Cytopenias, arthralgia, sicca, vasculitic rash, diffuse infiltrative lymphocytosis syndrome resembling Sjögren's | ANA, RF, antiphospholipid antibodies | HIV testing before immunosuppression, without exception. |
| Hepatitis C | Cryoglobulinaemic vasculitis, arthralgia, sicca | RF strongly positive, ANA, antiphospholipid antibodies | Hepatitis C serology and viral load. It is also a formal exclusion in the Sjögren's criteria. |
| Infective endocarditis | Fever, glomerulonephritis, splinter haemorrhages, low complement, cytopenias. Reproduces lupus nephritis and ANCA vasculitis together | ANCA, RF, ANA, low C3 and C4 | Blood cultures before antibiotics, and echocardiography. This is the classic error: a patient given pulse steroids for a presumed pulmonary-renal syndrome who had endocarditis. |
| IgG4-related disease | Tumefactive masses, pancreatitis, sialadenitis, retroperitoneal fibrosis. Mimics Sjögren's and vasculitis | Modestly raised serum IgG4; ANA can be positive | Histology showing storiform fibrosis and an IgG4-positive plasma cell infiltrate. |
4. Static and Dynamic Markers
Repeating a static marker costs money, delays nothing and answers no question. Where the patient is paying out of pocket, a repeated ENA panel is a real harm.
- ANA by immunofluorescence, and its pattern
- Anti-Sm, anti-Ro, anti-La
- Anti-U1 RNP, anti-Scl-70, anticentromere
- Myositis-specific antibodies
- Anti-CCP
- Anti-dsDNA titre
- Complement C3 and C4
- Urine protein-creatinine ratio and sediment
- ANCA titre, in selected patients
- Creatine kinase, in myositis
5. The ANA Pattern Is Half the Test
The staining pattern on HEp-2 cells, standardised internationally as ICAP anti-cell (AC) codes, predicts which antibodies will be found. A titre reported without a pattern has discarded half of what the test produced.
| Pattern | ICAP code | Expect | Associations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Homogeneous | AC-1 | dsDNA, nucleosome, histone | SLE, drug-induced lupus, juvenile idiopathic arthritis |
| Dense fine speckled | AC-2 | DFS70, and nothing else | Argues against a rheumatic disease when monospecific |
| Centromere | AC-3 | CENP-A, CENP-B | Limited cutaneous systemic sclerosis, primary biliary cholangitis |
| Fine or coarse speckled | AC-4, AC-5 | Ro, La, Sm, U1 RNP | SLE, Sjögren's, MCTD |
| Nuclear dots | AC-6, AC-7 | Sp100, PML | Primary biliary cholangitis |
| Nucleolar | AC-8 to AC-10 | Scl-70, PM-Scl, fibrillarin, Th/To, RNA pol I | Systemic sclerosis and overlap |
| Nuclear envelope | AC-11, AC-12 | gp210, lamins | Primary biliary cholangitis, autoimmune hepatitis |
| Cytoplasmic | AC-15 to AC-21 | Jo-1, ribosomal P, AMA-M2, SRP | Myositis, neuropsychiatric SLE, primary biliary cholangitis |
Point to note. A cytoplasmic pattern is frequently reported by laboratories as "ANA negative", because strictly it is not nuclear. In a patient with myositis or unexplained interstitial lung disease that reported negative may be concealing an anti-Jo-1. Read the comment on the report, not only the conclusion.
6. Classification Criteria Are Not Diagnostic Criteria
They exist to assemble homogeneous groups for research, and are weighted towards specificity so that trial cohorts are clean.
- The authors of the 2019 SLE criteria state directly that the criteria "should never be used to exclude patients who do not fully meet these criteria from receiving appropriate therapies".
- The commonest misuse is the reverse of the one people expect: not that criteria are used too loosely, but that a patient who genuinely has the disease is denied treatment because a score came to 8 rather than 10.
- This module reports the score and says whether the threshold is met. It does not tell you whether to treat.
7. Likelihood Ratios, and Why This Module Refuses to Multiply Them
Post-test odds equal pre-test odds multiplied by the likelihood ratio, but sequential multiplication is only valid when the tests are conditionally independent given the disease state. Autoantibodies are not: a patient with anti-Sm is far more likely than chance to also have anti-dsDNA and a high-titre ANA, and multiplying the ratios treats correlated evidence as independent.
- This module applies the single strongest likelihood ratio present, names it, and states its source and its limitations on screen.
- The one composite figure it uses, the likelihood ratio attached to the number of positive autoantibodies, was measured as a composite in the source study and is legitimate as a single step.
- Provenance. The likelihood ratios come from Li and colleagues, a retrospective study of 1,297 patients at a single Chinese tertiary hospital, of whom 148 had SLE. The comparison group is other patients who had the panel sent, not healthy people, so these figures describe a rheumatology referral population. Li graded the ANA as immunofluorescence intensity, 1+ to 4+, not as a dilution titre; the titre bands this module uses are an approximate alignment, which is one more reason to read the output as an order of magnitude. They should not be applied to unselected screening, and no equivalent Indian dataset was available. Where the module shows a probability it repeats this caveat.
8. What This Module Does Not Cover
Stated so that the boundary is explicit rather than implied.
- Organ-specific autoimmunity is out of scope. Autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cholangitis, coeliac disease, autoimmune thyroid disease, type 1 diabetes and LADA, myasthenia gravis, AQP4 and MOG antibody disease, autoimmune encephalitis, pemphigus and pemphigoid, and autoimmune gastritis are not evaluated here.
- The EULAR/ACR 2017 myositis probability is not computed. Those criteria convert a weighted score into a probability through a published regression model whose coefficients could not be verified to the standard this project requires. The module interprets the myositis-specific antibodies instead, and says so on every run.
- The ACR/EULAR 2023 antiphospholipid criteria are not applied. Sydney 2006 is what the module applies, and those criteria are verified against the primary record. The 2023 criteria exist and are more restrictive.
- Paediatric practice is not covered. The weights and thresholds here are the adult ones.
- Disease activity indices are not calculated. SLEDAI, BVAS, mRSS and the ESSDAI are separate instruments.
Abbreviations
AC code (ICAP Anti-Cell code) · ACPA (Anti-Citrullinated Protein Antibody) · ACR (American College of Rheumatology) · AMA-M2 (Anti-Mitochondrial Antibody, M2 Subtype) · ANA (Antinuclear Antibody) · ANCA (Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody) · APS (Antiphospholipid Syndrome) · AQP4 (Aquaporin-4) · ATT (Anti-Tubercular Therapy) · BVAS (Birmingham Vasculitis Activity Score) · C3 (Complement Component 3) · C4 (Complement Component 4) · c-ANCA (Cytoplasmic Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody) · CBNAAT (Cartridge-Based Nucleic Acid Amplification Test) · CCP (Cyclic Citrullinated Peptide) · CD4 (Cluster of Differentiation 4) · CENP-A / CENP-B (Centromere Protein A / Centromere Protein B) · CK (Creatine Kinase) · CLIA (Chemiluminescence Immunoassay) · CNS (Central Nervous System) · CRP (C-Reactive Protein) · CSF (Cerebrospinal Fluid) · CT (Computed Tomography) · DFS70 (Dense Fine Speckled 70 kDa) · DMARD (Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug) · dsDNA (Double-stranded DNA) · EGPA (Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis) · ELISA (Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay) · ENA (Extractable Nuclear Antigen) · ENT (Ear, Nose and Throat) · ESR (Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate) · ESSDAI (EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index) · EULAR (European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology) · GBM (Glomerular Basement Membrane) · gp210 (Glycoprotein 210 kDa) · GPA (Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis) · HEp-2 (Human Epithelial Type 2 Cell Line) · HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) · HLA (Human Leucocyte Antigen) · HMGCR (3-Hydroxy-3-Methylglutaryl-Coenzyme A Reductase) · HRCT (High Resolution Computed Tomography) · ICAP (International Consensus on ANA Patterns) · IFA (Immunofluorescence Assay) · IgG (Immunoglobulin G) · IgG4 (Immunoglobulin G4) · IgM (Immunoglobulin M) · IIM (Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathy) · ILD (Interstitial Lung Disease) · ISN/RPS (International Society of Nephrology / Renal Pathology Society) · ISTH (International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis) · Jo-1 (Histidyl-tRNA Synthetase) · LADA (Latent Autoimmune Diabetes in Adults) · LDH (Lactate Dehydrogenase) · LR (Likelihood Ratio) · MCP (Metacarpophalangeal) · MCTD (Mixed Connective Tissue Disease) · MDA5 (Melanoma Differentiation-Associated Gene 5) · MOG (Myelin Oligodendrocyte Glycoprotein) · MPA (Microscopic Polyangiitis) · MPO (Myeloperoxidase) · MR (Magnetic Resonance) · MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) · mRSS (Modified Rodnan Skin Score) · MSA (Myositis-Specific Antibody) · NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) · NXP2 (Nuclear Matrix Protein 2) · OSS (Ocular Staining Score) · PAH (Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension) · p-ANCA (Perinuclear Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody) · PIP (Proximal Interphalangeal) · PL-12 (Alanyl-tRNA Synthetase) · PL-7 (Threonyl-tRNA Synthetase) · PML (Promyelocytic Leukaemia Protein) · PM-Scl (Polymyositis-Scleroderma) · PR3 (Proteinase 3) · RA (Rheumatoid Arthritis) · RF (Rheumatoid Factor) · RNA (Ribonucleic Acid) · RNP (Ribonucleoprotein) · SAE (Small Ubiquitin-like Modifier Activating Enzyme) · Scl-70 (Scleroderma 70 kDa Antigen, Topoisomerase I) · SLE (Systemic Lupus Erythematosus) · SLEDAI (Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index) · Sp100 (Speckled 100 kDa Protein) · SRP (Signal Recognition Particle) · SSA (Sjögren's Syndrome-Related Antigen A) · SSB (Sjögren's Syndrome-Related Antigen B) · SSc (Systemic Sclerosis) · TIF1-gamma (Transcriptional Intermediary Factor 1 Gamma) · TNF (Tumour Necrosis Factor) · TRIM21 (Tripartite Motif-containing Protein 21) · UACR (Urine Albumin-to-Creatinine Ratio) · UPCR (Urine Protein-to-Creatinine Ratio)References
- Aringer M, Costenbader K, Daikh D, et al. 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology Classification Criteria for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019;71(9):1400-1412.
- van den Hoogen F, Khanna D, Fransen J, et al. 2013 classification criteria for systemic sclerosis: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(11):1747-1755.
- Shiboski CH, Shiboski SC, Seror R, et al. 2016 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for primary Sjogren's syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(1):9-16.
- Robson JC, Grayson PC, Ponte C, et al. 2022 American College of Rheumatology/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology classification criteria for granulomatosis with polyangiitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2022;81(3):315-320.
- Suppiah R, Robson JC, Grayson PC, et al. 2022 American College of Rheumatology/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology classification criteria for microscopic polyangiitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2022;81(3):321-326.
- Grayson PC, Ponte C, Suppiah R, et al. 2022 American College of Rheumatology/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology classification criteria for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2022;81(3):309-314.
- Aletaha D, Neogi T, Silman AJ, et al. 2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Arthritis Rheum. 2010;62(9):2569-2581.
- Miyakis S, Lockshin MD, Atsumi T, et al. International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). J Thromb Haemost. 2006;4(2):295-306.
- Satoh M, Chan EKL, Ho LA, et al. Prevalence and sociodemographic correlates of antinuclear antibodies in the United States. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64(7):2319-2327.
- Li H, Zheng Y, Chen L, Lin S. High titers of antinuclear antibody and the presence of multiple autoantibodies are highly suggestive of systemic lupus erythematosus. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):1687.
- Lundberg IE, Tjarnlund A, Bottai M, et al. 2017 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies and their major subgroups. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(12):1955-1964.
- Misra DP, Sharma A, Dharmanand BG, Chandrashekara S. The Epidemiology of Rheumatic Diseases in India. Indian J Rheumatol. 2024;19(Suppl 1).
- Dhooria A, Naidu GSRSNK, Misra DP, et al. Indian Rheumatology Association guidelines for the management of ANCA associated vasculitis. Autoimmun Rev. 2024;23(11):103647.
How to Cite This Tool
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22401558
AMA Style:Umakanth S. ANA and Autoimmune Serology Pathway. Version 2.1. MEDiscuss Clinical Decision Support System. Published 2026. Accessed . https://mediscuss.org/cdss/autoimmune-profile-evaluator. doi:10.5281/zenodo.22401558
Vancouver Style:Umakanth S. ANA and Autoimmune Serology Pathway [Internet]. Version 2.1. MEDiscuss.org; 2026 [cited ]. Available from: https://mediscuss.org/cdss/autoimmune-profile-evaluator. doi:10.5281/zenodo.22401558
Save this calculation
Whatever you type here stays on this device and is not sent anywhere. The server receives only a scrambled code made from it, so nobody with access to the server can tell which patient a saved calculation belongs to. Enter the same nickname the next time to see that patient's earlier values. What is stored
